What's Next for Manhunt 2? June 28, 2007

Introduction

Page:: ( 1 / 5 )

The British Board of Film Classification, which also handles ratings for video and PC games in that country, rendered a decision to ban the sale of Manhunt 2 in UK stores last week (the Irish equivalent rating board quickly followed up with their own ban of the game). In its printed decision the board stated that in other games they try to recommend cuts or changes to make the game acceptable to the ratings system. However in Mahunt 2's case the board felt that could not happen, saying, "Manhunt 2 is distinguishable from recent high-end video games by its unremitting bleakness and callousness of tone in an overall game context which constantly encourages visceral killing with exceptionally little alleviation or distancing. There is sustained and cumulative casual sadism in the way in which these killings are committed, and encouraged, in the game" The statement concluded with the board saying that in their opinion allowing the sale of the game in the UK would cause "a range of unjustifiable harm risks, to both adults and minors, within the terms of the Video Recordings Act, and accordingly that its availability, even if statutorily confined to adults, would be unacceptable to the public."

[image]

Politics?

Page:: ( 2 / 5 )

[image]

SNM	Page:: ( 3 / 5 )

Desi told us, "We feel it’s a privilege to be on a console, not a developer’s right. Console companies have the right to set their own policies regarding content. Again, I think the real issue is that the AO rating currently has the effect of a Scarlet Letter A. As consumers in a supposedly free market society we should be able to choose what we want to purchase or play, no different than other entertainment products. Unfortunately the video game industry has not matured to that point yet."

[image]

Take Two's options

Page:: ( 4 / 5 )

Smart told us that in his opinion, Take Two has only two real options: "(a). Scrap it. After all, unless it sells, the developers can't recoup the development advances. Take2 can easily write it off. In fact, if they did this, it would go a long - long - way to showing the industry that this new gang at Take2, take this stuff seriously. That premise is rubbish of course; since one would still ask how they [Take2] allowed a game of this nature to get this far without the producer reigning the developers in. If this were my company - and I were in a management position - I'm having everybody - and I do mean everybody involved with the project - fired. This is just as bad as that whole "hot coffee"debacle which cost the company so much in such a short time. You'd think that someone had learned a valuable lesson. I guess not. (b) Scrap the boxed retail release and sell it via digital distribution. Sure, the mainstream retailers (e.g. Walmart) with websites still won't sell it; but thats irrelevant because I'm sure that IGN won't mind the business. :-D Heck, Steam has close to three million subscribers. You throw it up there and my guess is that they'd probably recoup - at the very least - their dev expenses. Of course that [recoupment] would take longer than a boxed retail release"

Desi told us that Take Two should try to charge ahead and release the game with its original AO rating, saying, "What they should do now is what they should have done with ‘Hot Coffee” – they should man up to it and attempt to validate the AO rating as a legitimate consumer product, accurately rated, and acceptable to a certain audience, instead of back pedaling and only making the situation worse. A major publisher like Take 2 has the ability to make a difference. Only when major corporate players in our industry decide to address this content issue realistically (and honestly) will our industry grow for the better. They need to take a hard look, an honest view, and ask themselves is this game fun to play or does it suck. I don’t see them being altruistic at all. They will find a way to get it published and salvage what they can."

And how does this latest brush with the ratings board affect game developers as a whole? Fawkner told us, "Not at all. If we were doing a game like this, I would be working with the appropriate groups from day one, making sure that we didn't cross any lines. Desi also said, "Not at all. There is a difference between AO for extreme sexual or violent content, and fun sexual teasing or slap happy comedic violent humor. We’re making POSTAL III, and we have one goal – to make it a FUN game to play, and as FUNNY as it can be at the same time. When are developers going to realize games are supposed to be fun? POSTAL III will be on Xbox 360/PC/Mac. We take our responsibility as game designers very seriously. Our goal is to make POSTAL III a great game that is fun and not obsessed with violence or immature adult humor, not to shock or reward negative social behavior." Kingsley repeated their statements, saying "Not at all, particularly if they are games with a strong creative theme and the adult content is present for a reason. Most audiences can tell the difference between classical erotica and gonzo porn."

Conclusion

Page:: ( 5 / 5 )

Chmielarz, however, believes that there might be some effects on this decision to game developers, but added that those effects are, ".... not in a way most people suspect. I actually believe it's very interesting and challenging to create an adult game while having some limitations. Take "24" for example, no one has any doubts it's brutal, adult TV, yet they don't have any cursing there. Or "Godfather" - second part features an extreme gore, yet it's considered one of the best movies ever and is available to wide public. So it's doable, you can have adult product without the stigma of AO sticker. But if you choose a theme for your game like Rockstar did with Manhunt, you are basically asking for it..."

[image]