My thoughts exactly.

When it was first revealed that the game was given an AO rating; banned in the UK, but before we found out Nintendo and Sony wouldn't allow it at all, a lot of people were expecting two versions of the game. An M and an uncut edition sold through Rockstar's website. I'm very surprised that wasn't the route taken. As far as the "artistic merit" argument, from the looks of it this game was going to be as lame as the first looked, but when the entire allure to the series is the horror/violence and you cut it out, that's obviously going to stifle it significantly.

Another point to make, I'm sure the Wii version's "interactive control" was a pretty big driving force behind the AO decision, which is kind of a joke. I'm really quite disappointed by the Wii's controls, and I doubt it could ever be employed in a way that's truly realistic or immersive.

Unfair.

Wow. Great piece.

I have to say, I've not got a great deal of sympathy for Rockstar. They flirt with controversy on nearly every title to gain a bit of publicity, sometimes I wonder if Manhunt is as gory as it is purely for hype's sake, and they lied through their teeth on the Hot Coffee scandal, which nearly fucked over so many parts of the games and rating industry.

On the other hand, they're a fantastic collection of developers, and one of the biggest independent studios out there. For all the controversy over so many of their games, they also tend to turn out to be damn good games too, which makes my dislike of their "edginess" all the more frustrating.

I'm mostly disappointed with Sony and Nintendo though. After the latter claimed they'd be more accomodating to adult games this generation (after Manhunt 2 was originally announced for the Wii), and when the former has a track record of letting developers have much more of a free reign on their console, I didn't like the way they immediately went and washed their hands of the situation. Just as you've pointed out, if the industry is going to stand up to the AO rating, it would be nice to have the larger companies say "Yes, we will allow this creative freedom on our consoles."

I guess it just stems from the fact that, to the non-gaming world, the maker of a console is intrinsically linked to any game that comes out for it. No-one would ever think to blame Sony for a horrific film coming out on Blu-ray, yet they would in a instant for a game like Manhunt.

Fantastic article, if this is the future of the site then keep up the good work.

If there is a game that deserves an AO rating, one where you hunt down and murder people is most likely the best candidate. I'm just saying.

I agree that Manhunt deserves that rating, and probably a few others. But it's more that the rating suddenly makes a game non-existant that sucks. If there was a developer that was willing to back their AO game, avenues to market it well, and distributors to make it available widely enough to make it at least somewhat successful, that might change. But that's a lot to ask.

I do agree it is ridiculous to have an "AO" rating simply to put in games that nobody will ship. That just seems ridiculous.

Two things need to happen to see any change on this front:

1. Videogames need to be held to the same standards as films. Not in terms of artistic merit, but in the sense that an image receives the same treatment whether presented in a film or in a videogame. Tell me how this is a controversy and I'll tell you how you're biased against certain forms of media.

2. A top-tier developer needs to grow a pair of balls. (And no, Rockstar isn't top-tier.) If the next Gears of War received an AO rating and the suits stood their ground, the embargo against AO would crumble as Wal-Mart lost sales to specialty retailers. Manhunt 2 is a curiosity, not a killer app (if you'll pardon the pun), and it does not have the cachet needed to tear down this wall.

So I guess you guys need to get busy. Should we break off into teams, or what?

To be honest, I can see where the woman is coming from with the photo of her kid. I think they probably would have the same reaction had it been used in a movie. It's not about it being in a game, it's that using the last known photo of someone's child before they were murdered as set decoration is a little.. crass.

I think "crass" might be a little harsh, but I'm willing to concede that images of real tragedy are too often sensationalized across all media.

If you're trying to tell me that it is okay for a video of a child being led to his death (and the video is being used against the wishes of the parents) doesn't constitute a controversy of some kind, I really don't know what to say to you.

Using that video is just shitty, and spectacularly sloppy on the part of the developers for not even seeking permission. And if they didn't know what it was, they should have found out or used something else. Wow, that's really awful.

No top-tier developer is going to grow those balls because things ain't broke as far as they're concerned. Either way, Rockstar seems pretty top-tier in that all the suits found time to make a big deal out of landing GTAIV for their consoles. If anyone could pull it off, it'd be them. They're perfect for it, actually, because they already have the well-known name and reputation. If they stood behind a well-made AO game, the media controversy would cover all marketing. Once they found a large enough outfit to distribute it (that's the big key), people would scramble for it based on hype and taboo alone.

For the record, the image from the video as it was used in the game can be seen here. Not exploitative, but still not a smart idea.

Yeah, I take back what I said about Rockstar. I'm not a big fan of their games, but I think I have to bow to their sales figures.

The game that breaks the AO barrier will most likely have to come from an unknown studio that just happens to stumble into a blockbuster. It's not a very likely scenario, but the growing prevalence of digital distribution slightly evens the odds.

And just so you guys don't think I'm a slavering ogre, I had seen that screencap well in advance of writing my post.

Yeah I don't see how Rockstar aren't top tier when I could bet you any amount of money that GTAIV will outsell any Gears game.

I'm not sure whether they'd be the ones to stand up to an AO rating though. They might, but being a third-party developer, it's too easy for the console manufacturers to distance themselves, as they have here. Maybe if it was GTAIV and the companies knew the reward would still beat the risk involved, but even then I think they'd just settle for changing the game. After all, the plain fact is that it'll sell more if it's toned down to be sold in Walmart.

I hope the BBFC reverse their banning of the game over here though, as I like the fact that we approach games the same as films over here, and there's far less stigma on an 18-rated game (until the clueless parties get involved anyway).

I think Rockstar could because it's become expected of them. Most other developers would get cold feet about trying it out for fear of tarnishing their name, but Rockstar has never been afraid of scandal, for better or worse. Because of that and the following they have for their reputation, they have a good shot I'd say at marketing an AO game to a wide audience. But again, who is willing to distribute it?

The "Will Rockstar/Won't Rockstar" debate will only be settled when (if) they release a PC port of Manhunt 2. The rating attached to that product will be terribly significant.

It's interesting that the US has this problem. In Australia, the problem comes from there not being an adult R18 (you must be over 18 to buy it) rating. This means that a bunch of games are too graphic to be rated M15+ (it is recommended that you are 15 to buy it), and so the only alternative the ratings panel has is to ban the game.

I find it quite odd that US stores are so hesitant to stock adult rated games. Why is this? I know Blockbuster is run by godbags, and I assume Walmart is too, but surely there are also some non-puritanical distribution channels?

Also Manhunt 2 will be shit.

Part of the problem is that all the specialty video game retailers -- Gamestop, EB, Babbages, Software Etc. -- are owned by the same company now. So if they decide not to offer AO games (and right now they probably think it's not worth the trouble, as the majority of AO titles are awful sex games), that screws most of your options.

I am curious as to whether Sam Goody would sell AO games, given that they already have a section for softcore adult videos.

I think the issue is being approached as a moral/censorship issue when it's not. If we're applying the same standards to movies as we do to games - that Manhunt 2 is intended for adults like Hostel 2 is intended for adults, thus the ratings reflect this - then it's not really the problem that Manhunt 2 is restricted to adults, but the implications of this. And it is not the ESRB controlling these implications, but the platforms that refuse to house Adults Only titles (like the Wii) and the retailers that refuse to stock them (Wal-mart, et al). This appears, on the surface, like nothing more than an attempt to take the moral high ground. In reality, it's a smart business move.

For corporations like Wal-mart and Nintendo to establish their brand as family friendly is more important (and more profitable to them) than any short-term profits they receive from sales of Manhunt 2. They are no doubt loving this controversy because it paints them as willing to assert the family-friendliness of their brand under some pretty considerable and public pressure. You can't buy that kind of PR.

The anger at the ESRB is misplaced. If the game were still on shelves (but available to buy/loan only to adults) then I don't think there'd be much controversy. It's the stance of companies like Nintendo and Wal-mart which are creating the situation we are in now. And let's face it: they're not going to back down, because it'd be damaging to their brand image to do so.

I have to agree with Natasha. I do believe that Nintendo's move comes from selling themselves (as they always have) as a family product, heck, they even installed a censorship code in the Wiis for that reason.

I'm not a big fan of Rockstar. I've played most GTA titles (except San Andreas) and while they can be amusing, I really don't see them as true masterpieces of the gaming industry. This is why I think that Nintendo won't change its stance on selling Manhunt (though maybe sony will), simply because Rockstar is just not a very bug fish yet.

About the rating, again, I agree with Natasha, Manhunt deserves and AO rating since it is too graphical to be played by kids and pre-teens, so the rating is ok.