|
|
Manhunt 2 banned by BBFC
Author: Brett ThomasPublished: 20th June 2007
"If you buy this, we'll hunt you down and kill you." - The BBFC has made Manhunt 2 illegal to purchase in the UK.
Banning Manhunt 2 marks the second time that the British Board of Film Classification has outright banned a game, effectively acting as censors for the British populous (the first time was Carmageddon, back in 1997). Without any rating, the game will now be illegal to acquire in the UK. David Cooke, the Director of the BBFC, explained the decision:
"Manhunt 2 is distinguishable from recent high-end video games by its unremitting bleakness and callousness of tone. There is sustained and cumulative casual sadism in the way in which these killings are committed, and encouraged, in the game."
The Board's decision has thrilled the family of a Leicester boy who was murdered in 2004. His parents blamed the original Manhunt for his death, saying that the killer trained by playing the game. Granted, the police didn't seem to believe so, saying that the murder was a robbery gone wrong - but who has time for those little details?
They have campaigned actively to ban the sequel, calling it "morally irresponsible". The parents' voices have certainly been amplified by their MP, who called the BBFC's decision "excellent" and said that it showed "that game publishers cannot expect to get interactive games where players take the part of killers engaged in 'casual sadism' and murder."
Unlike in the US, the BBFC's mature (18+) rating is legally enforceable and selling the game to a minor would have carried strict punishment anyway. The game's developer, Rockstar, has six weeks to file an appeal and either modify the game's content to appease the board or agree to not market the game in the UK. If the BBFC maintains its ban, Manhunt 2 will be the first game that actually could not be sold - Carmageddon's ban was lifted after the blood colour was changed and other small gameplay tweaks were added to decrease realism.
Do you have a thought on the censorship? Does this seem like a sensible step to prevent the game's appeal to minors, or does it seem like outright censorship in a country known for its first-class freedoms? Tell us your thoughts in our forums.
Related
Comments (50)
Compare over 250 mobile phones &
52,000 deals!
Compare over 100 broadband & mobile broadband deals online!
- Site Links:
- About
- Email Editor
- Newsletter
- Privacy
- RSS
- Score Guide
- Our Other Websites:
- Auto Express
- Channel Pro
- Computer Buyer
- Computer Shopper
- Den of Geek
All content © bit-tech.net 2000-2009
© Copyright Dennis Publishing Limited licensed by Felden
That ends my caffeine induced 2 in the morning ramble on the subject, sorry if it makes no sense.
i've no interest in the game but i'm sick of people passing their responsibility on to others.
The original manhunt was quite a good mix of game genres. There was violence, but also a good deal of stealth required.
As discussed in the other thread (Console Gaming) the problem comes when the BBFC can not guarantee that an underage child will not be able to easily obtain the game, parents will just buy or order it not look at the rating and hand it over.
So is that bad upbringing or video games?
Can we really prove that someone with a bad upbringing who played nothing but Mario Bros wouldn't be violent?
I reckon they would and would just stomp on heads instead of shooting.
Having said that, I read somewhere about someone comparing this to the Saw movies and wondered why they were allowed and this was banned.
I think the interactive nature of this where you actually are the killer and are doing the actions (albeit virtually) makes this more visceral.
I do hold parents responsible though tbh.
I had a good upbringing even though I started watching 18rated movies at the age of 12 or something.
I'm not a crazed murderer (honest).
Mainly because I knew right from wrong...
I think stores should sell games just like they sell alcoholics: Little alcohol only above 16+ and much alcohol above 18+.
Also, I think that parents should look at what theyre kids are doing on the computer.
People have car crashed -> Lower the speed limit and add a speed camera.
People get murdered -> Ban violet influences.
People have accidents -> Try and prevent it from happening again (after trying to find some blame).
We are headed backwards at the moment. The government want us to stop flying, driving, using electricity, doing anything remotely interesting.
I'm surprised you don't have to sign your life away when you get on a train these days.
Also, by refusing to rate it they only stop its sale in shops. Fans needn't whine as they will still be able to get hold of it through other means, thoguh if they break the law in doing so then that is their choice.
It's in the Bit article!
Exactly. I completely agree, however i can see the "powers that be" trying to use the arguement that the car in question isn't "implying" that it's nature is to do harm but really to provide a solution to a problem which is a 'netural' action -- i.e., transportation, whereas the video game, while not real and pure fantasy, is suggesting or implying that you "do" violence or that it's enjoyable to watch/imagine/think about the actions in the game.
Again, I COMPLETELY DISAGREE with that notion (that games lead to violent behaviour) but it's the people who want to make our decisions for us that can't understand that. And so long as they have that power, to decide what's best for us, we're stuck.
As for appeal -- did Rockstar appeal or did the BBFC not say they had been given time to appeal and they didn't..?
From kotaku:
[quote=]News of Manhunt 2's Adult Only rating was like a "punch to the stomach" of the Rockstar team, a company spokesman told Kotaku today.
"This is completely unexpected to the whole team," said the spokesman. "We love the horror genre. We thought we could do something interesting and entertaining with it in the video game medium. When we had this first Manhunt game, there wasn't this reaction. We thought (Manhunt 2) was consistent with a mature rating."
But the game, which follows in the footsteps of mature-rated Manhunt, will likely not show up on many store shelves if the ESRB's preliminary rating of Adults Only sticks.
Take-Two has the option of either protesting the rating to an Appeals Board, which is made up of publishers, retailers and other professionals, or change the Wii and PS2 game's content and resubmit it.
When asked if the game might receive a work over to tone it down, the spokesman said it was too early to tell.
"We have to explore all of the options," he said. "I think it's too early to go into all of that right now." Brian Crecente
[/quote]
Same here, i only played an hour or so of the original and found it dull, but since all the hype around this, i'd be interested in looking for it.
There's nothing wrong with giving something like that a rating, it gives people a chance to make an informed choice about what they are purchasing.
However it is wrong to just out right ban something, just because one person may or may not have harmed another because of it. There has never been a single solitary thread of proof that video games can cause someone to flip out and blur the lines of reality and fiction.
I can tell you for a fact that playing a videogame doesn't prepare you for anything in real life. You can be the best Halo sniper in the world but if you've never picked up a real rifle you're not gonna hit the broad side of a bus. And just because you can knock out free bird on expert in Guitar hero doesn't mean you can play the real thing.
Parents have become lazy, and apathetic. They're not as involved in their childrens lives as they should be. Video games aren't the problem, it's the people trying to use them as scapegoats to cover thier own mistakes and short comings.
.....booh-ya
The BBFC is taking the choice away from (would be) responsible individuals and forcing them to conform to some rather stupid "law".
In all fairness though, I can't see why a game thats based on casual violence, and disturbing murders would WANT to be bought by the British public anyway. Where's the entertainment in finding the most gruesome way to kill someone??
just gonna make the kids want it more, (will be the same as the copies of driller killer and cannibal holocaust i passed round the playground)
If the parents are too negligent to adequately protect there kids/raise them properly, then go crying that they are blaimless(brainless??) and it was all someone else's fault. So be it, society needs protecting from them, not protection from the next thing they want to bitch about.
End of the day people need to start taking responsibility for them selves, and there children until they are legally an adult (18). This whole find maddy thing, if the parents had done there jobs and not left there kids unattended would that have happened? yeah its a shame that there kid is missing, but seriously why are they not in court on grounds of negligence?
As far as censorship goes, im pretty against all forms of it, if nothing else there are always going to be unofficial ways of getting hold of anything, the legality of obtaining is a relative thing. for example hardcore pr0n, pot and any of the US series you have on HDD that havnt aired in the uk yet, i doubt many of you would feel like any laws you may have broken will give you a moral dilemma, all censorship does is drive up the demand, just look at prohibition America, and all the good that did
I loved the original Manhunt. It had some interesting and some funny social commentary, along with some very atmospheric horror. The violence was just in context.
True Rockstar were trying to push the boundaries to provoke a reaction, but it was interesting to see how far they could go. After all videogames have no bearing whatsoever on reality, so adults should be able to do anything they want in a game without any fear of consequence.
CardJoe mentioned good taste, but good taste is subjective. Offense to one person might be hilarity/interest to another. As long as things remain private if necessary, then what's the dilly?
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2007/04/18/BBFC_releases_gaming_report/1
Yes, offense is subject, but we chose to stay in a society where the BBFC exists and a large panel is used by them to make this decision. We could rise up and stop them if we wanted to, gamers aren't exactly a small group after all, but I don't see anybody willing to cry revoloution over this and fans can still get their games from abroad if they are that commited to doing so.
On the other hand, I'm cynical enough to believe that Rockstar deliberately pushed the boundary too far to get this reaction and will then appeal the BBFC, as they are allowed and as Carmageddon did, and present a toned down product that will hit the shelves - though Nintendo may not back the Wii version anymore knowing them. That gets them lots of free publicity and the attention of the people on here who want to play the game just to understand the controversy despite the fact they found the original a mediocre game. My opinion of the original was that it was a over-violent game which tried to hide behind social issues so people would defend it. There wasn't anything really thought-provoking in there.
My two cents.
On my course at uni we study censorship, it comes up in discussion quite a lot and all of us agree that the only reason it exists is so that people can't blame the government for killing sprees etc. Also it demonises the media, so that parents who fail at raising children properly can blame the EVIL video games or the evil movies etc.
this is a step towards a nany state, be careful you British guys.
if you don't want to play the game and think it is extremely disgusting then don't buy it, just stamp a 18+ on it and say that it is the son of the devil and be done with it, if parents are responsible then kids will not get these games, and life it self is more disturbing than most video games i played, so lets ban life.
By banning the game we also ensure that the game isn't finding its way into the hands of younger children, because like it or not most games store clerks don't give a **** about it and I've personally seen copies of games like GTA and Manhunt sold to under twelves on numerous occasions and have bought such games myself at a young age.
As pointed out before, properly aged fans will still be able to import a copy if they must, the government is just trying to do its best to keep this material restricted.
And a nanny state? No, it's a continued effort to follow the laws which UK citizens continually agree to live by. It's also only the second time this has happened, first if you remember that carmageddon was un-banned after modifications. When it happens ten times then I'll say it's a nanny state and you'll see me at the front of the marches, making my voice heard. Until then, theres no point in over-reacting to the fact that an uber violent game was banned by a government body established to professionally regulate it, for the second time ever.
I also believe that there isn't a clear cut line between parent and childs reponsibility. Before I was 18 I did a lot of crazy, illegal stuff that my parents bought me up not to do and which they actively encouraged me not to do. Thats not my parents fault, they did everything they could to stop it, but it is my fault despite my age and regardless of how everyone would assume it could be the product of a poor upbringing.
I guess this is a game we will have to get through bit-torrent then.
as far as I'm concerned if it hasn't got kiddie porn in it then it shouldn't be banned.
when someone decided to replicate a game, axes someones head off, sees the red bloody and goes, ah bollox i thought it was green like in the games
Seriously, WHAT DIFFERENCE does it make, whether the blood is green, red, pink, orange, technicolour, etc
Anyway, this ban isn't going to stop anything, you can get it from bittorrent, or they can just use an online delivery system and ignore the ratings completely
Very true. Controversy doesn't replace quality.
this was the case before video games existed too. there have always been issues with such problems. the same kid that shoots up a school because of lack of empathy was the same kid in the 50s that stomped a kids head in at the playground in the 50s. if a kid is miswired to be evil and have the natural desire to kill, then he will. has nothing to do with what he is exposed to. you are talking about an instinct that is coded in them. no video game, movie, TV show, is going to change that, i mean ****, kids learn about all the violence they need to in history classes. does that mean we should stop teaching kids about the worlds violent history? cause real violence i would imagine is certainly allot more effective then simulated.
i mean who are you gonna blame for things like, Ted Bundy, Jack the Ripper, Son of Sam, the Zodiac killer, Charles Manson. all of those people never even dreamed of a video game before they killed someone. yes they were older at the time they were prevalent, but they had been methodically doing it over years as apposed to one big outburst. Video games have changed nothing.
As for this issue about effect of games, yes I agree that some people are miswired to do bad things anyway but it doesn't mean that allowing to them be exposed to things like manhunt is a good idea. It's a good idea to stop people like that being exposed to this game and a good idea to stop children and minors from being exposed also. Meanwhile, adults who really want to get it still can get the game, though they have to acknowledge they are going against the laws of the society they choose to live in.
QFT.
I don't normally agree with banning and outright censorship, but since the game was probably going to be dire and shallow anyway it's probably a good thing.
Plus, previous cases of controversy have revolved around games like Grand Theft Auto and Carmageddon which put a tongue-in-cheek twist on the violence, whereas the Manhunt games are decidedly darker and, dare I say it, more perverted.
On top of that, the game was being released on the Wii, a console with associations with the younger, more impressionable demographic - The Mario, Zelda and Pokémon demographic - It may be up to the parents to monitor what games they play, but the majority of parents don't do it, so it's probably for the best that the BBFC stepped in.
that part is the responsibility of the parent, and in the case of a miswired kid, swinging around a sward in zelda is still teaching them a violent action. so it again goes to say, that miswired kids are miswired no matter what they are exposed to. you're saying this game should be banned because its pointless violence, but to a kid that has no empathy, all killing is for no reason, its just killing, and killing for revenge is probably worse, because they will think killing for any revenge is acceptable.
so because most people don't drive the speed limit or don't drive with sensibility when consuming alcohol we should ban cars?
No, but we should actively try to stop drink drivers and ban cars which are unsafe from being on the road, as well as banning unsafe drivers...
May the well-worn paths of your mind lead to happy and productive places.
Postal 2 was allowed, wasn't it? Manhunt 2 has to be worse than that to get banned, which should be an indication of its quality and content.
Bioshock is designed to give the player a distinct choice, you can try and kill the girls, but you'd have to first kill the big daddy, then when it comes to the girls, if you kill them you move to one side of the game and get an immediate bonus, if you save them you move to the other side and get a bonus at a later time which is better for you.
Bioshock is set in a distinctly different world as well, and it's killing mutants to save your life, not to kill for the sake of killing.
The question though, what stops these guys from beeing "activated" from any other source like movies, comics news, whatever. And what says that these guys aren't adult and can get a hold of the game anyways?
Killing little girls, with the very sad missing Maddie case in the headlines, do you honestly think if the Daily mail for example, pick up on this title it won't be banned?
Yes I did, I understand what you're saying about Bioshock's in game choices and I agree. I was just playing Devil's advocate, pointing out that normal BBFC reasoning may go out of the window under the pressure of a serious media campaign.
There have been many psychological experiments regardng this and do you know what they found. NOTHING. Children who played violent video games, watched violent t.v. where no more likely to be violent than those who did. In fact the funny thing was that people playing the video games actually got in less trouble at school and the law because they were in playing video games and didnt have the opportunity to. I am not saying they should stay in all the time and become socially stagnant, but I found it amusing. All this is regardless however because at the end of the day if you can not teach your child that it is wrong to kill, then it is the parents fault full stop.
Despite what CardJoe said there is no inherent 'evil' gene. We may produce more testosteroine or be schizophrenic (paranoid) but the idea that there is a gene is a stupid with no scientific evidence. I know I did degree bilogical Psychology. Blame the parents and allow the game and stop this nanny state from going any further, before we all end up in 1984!!!!!!