IGN has had some hands on the M rated version of Manhunt 2 and explained the differences they have seen compared with the original AO version

http://au.wii.ign.com/articles/819/819465p1.aspx

I' ll have to say i probably won' t get this game due to the excessive violence.

ORIGINAL: Terrak

I' ll have to say i probably won' t get this game due to the excessive violence.

Fukkin pussy.

So it' s a stealth game with extra gore. YAWN.

ORIGINAL: Nitro

ORIGINAL: Terrak

I' ll have to say i probably won' t get this game due to the excessive violence.

Fukkin pussy.

Hehe, that must be my Religious upbringing.

Anyway i realise its sort of survival game, where he has to survive against psychos, but i can' t get my head around such sadistic ways of killing people. Killing to survive-yes, but torturing to survive thats different. Who knows i might change my mind if reviews say otherwise.

According to some different previews, they all felt as if the violence made sense within the context of the game.

I still do think it' s ridiculous that games can' t be " adults only" for real. Why are other media allowed to?

Fukkin pussy.



Hehe, that must be my Religious upbringing .

I was raised in a very religious upbringing... which is why I play M-rated games.

Seriously though, the first was rubbish, I have very little hope for the second. Not just on a moral level either. I thought the game had excessive sadistic violence, it just kind of cramped what could have been a functional game. I appreciate a realistic amount of blood & gore in games that are supposed to represent something violent, but violence for violence' s sake? It bores me on a conceptual level.

Edit: This isn' t directed at anybody in particular by the way.

Anybody who says that not releasing Adults Only games on consoles is about restriction of free-speech is either uninformed, or just plain full of it as far as I' m concerned.

There' s absolutely no limitations as to how violent or racy a PC game can get. If it were a matter of free-speech and the smothering of the arts, Rockstar would simply pull all of their console versions and release the unadulterated version on the PC. But it' s not. It' s about publicity, and it' s about more revenue. It' s a win-win situation for Rockstar. They make an incredibly violent game, and it gets released.

Or...

They try to release an incredibly violent video game, get a month' s worth of publicity, and release a toned down version of the game to rabid fans and sell thousands.

I still do think it' s ridiculous that games can' t be " adults only" for real. Why are other media allowed to?

Other media are allowed to, but there' s tradeoffs... in the U.S., the equivalent rating for a film is NC-17. But there are no national theater chains that will show NC-17 films, and some video stores won' t even stock them. So, you can have total creative freedom if you are willing to sacrifice 99% of your potential audience! A lousy situation.

Hehe, that must be my Religious upbringing .

I pitty da fool...

There' s absolutely no limitations as to how violent or racy a PC game can get. If it were a matter of free-speech and the smothering of the arts, Rockstar would simply pull all of their console versions and release the unadulterated version on the PC. But it' s not. It' s about publicity, and it' s about more revenue. It' s a win-win situation for Rockstar. They make an incredibly violent game, and it gets released.

Or...

They try to release an incredibly violent video game, get a month' s worth of publicity, and release a toned down version of the game to rabid fans and sell thousands.

Its not just about violence, the fear of sex in games is even worse. Games featuring nudity or even sex has to be heavily modified to get released in the statesm which prohibits many developers for adding it in the games because amercians are so uptight about it.

Somehow all characters in games are deprived of one of the most basic needs. Though it wouldnt fit all games, some games would benefit from the option of having sex.

I dont think a 12 year old kid will be damaged seeing some nudity in a game, anymore than he will be watching a head sawn off in a game.

There should be a law banning the console companies from not accepting AO rated games, as well as a law that states that they must be availeble in standard stores.

Other media are allowed to, but there' s tradeoffs... in the U.S., the equivalent rating for a film is NC-17. But there are no national theater chains that will show NC-17 films, and some video stores won' t even stock them. So, you can have total creative freedom if you are willing to sacrifice 99% of your potential audience! A lousy situation.

True. Though the porn industry for example is doing " quite well" anyway without the need for theater chains. I think, just as for movies there should be a different section or something for certain games then.
The fact that these games aren' t allowed is probably due to the fact that consoles are still seen as products that should offer clean, wholesome family fun. In the mind of politicians and the powers that be at least.

So it' s a stealth game with extra gore. YAWN.

That' s why I want to get it. I love stealth games!

I HATE the stealthy bits in Zelda games, though.

BBFC Rejects Manhunt 2 in UK Again
Revised edition of the game doesn' t " address concerns about the original version" .
by Rob Burman, IGN UK


UK, October 8, 2007 - Rockstar' s attempts to publish its Manhunt 2 in the UK, following the British Board of Film Classification' s decision to deny the game a rating, has hit another brick wall. The BBFC has now rejected a revised edition of the game, saying that, although it recognises that changes have been made, they don' t go far enough to address concerns raised with the original submission.

David Cooke, director of the BBFC said: " The impact of the revisions on the bleakness and callousness of tone, or the essential nature of the gameplay, is clearly insufficient. There has been a reduction in the visual detail in some of the ' execution kills' , but in others they retain their original visceral and casually sadistic nature.

" We did make suggestions for further changes to the game, but the distributor has chosen not to make them, and as a result we have rejected the game on both platforms. The decision on whether or not an appeal goes ahead lies with the distributor."

Rockstar Responds to Latest BBFC Ban
Developer will continue to appeal the decision to ban Manhunt 2 in the UK.
by Rob Burman, IGN UK


UK, October 8, 2007 - After the British Board of Film Classification announced earlier today that it' s refused to classify a re-edited version of Manhunt 2 in the UK, Rockstar has responded to the decision and called it " unnacceptable" .

Speaking to IGN, a spokesman said: " We are continuing to appeal the British Board of Film Classification' s (BBFC) decision to deny the edited version of Manhunt 2 an 18+ certificate and thereby ban its release in the United Kingdom.

" The changes necessary in order to publish the game in Britain are unacceptable to us and represent a setback for video games. The BBFC allows adults the freedom to decide for themselves when it comes to horror in movies and we think adults should be similarly allowed to decide for themselves when it comes to horror in video games, such as Manhunt 2."

Well we all know that the ESRB gave it a mature rating. But the BBFC being idiots about this.

Well the game is going to come out in Belgium for sure. Sucks for you guys in Britain though. Well just import the game from another European country I would say.

I think we all get the picture: Brits are stone crazy and perpetually on the edge of going psycho. Making a stabbing motion with the Wiimote would drive them over the edge and send droves of tea-drinking brutes into the streets looking for blood!

On the bright side: they' ve been spared yet another Rockstar game with janky, unedited motion capture animation and clunk controls. I' m sure the soundtrack was killer though.

Is there an Action Replay for the Wii yet? I' m gong to America next month.

ORIGINAL: Vx Chemical

some games would benefit from the option of having sex.

HOW?
How would having sex in a game improve it in any way unless it' s a game about sex, which would have a AO rating anyway?

How would having sex in a game improve it in any way unless it' s a game about sex, which would have a AO rating anyway

Its a part of story telling. As movies benefit from sex scenes they dont have to actually be porn movies.

I think its pretty fucked up blowing peoples heads off doesnt give an AO rating, but seeing a penis go into a vagina is!

If i had to choose between my daughter blowing someone away or getting fucked, id choose the latter. Though she' d best wait like 13 years or so. Unless she shoots someone, then it would be best if she did it around now, so she couldnt get punished


/rambling

VX is right. The standards are all ***ed up. It' s ok to play a game where we rip some guys head off and put it on a pike as long as we don' t see anyone naked. It' s stupid.

HOW?
How would having sex in a game improve it in any way unless it' s a game about sex, which would have a AO rating anyway?

That' s an unfair question. A better way to ask it, would be to ask how would removing the content improve the game?

Why can' t we just permit the artistic freedoms of the developers? Why should they be censored? Who' s image are we trying to preserve?

I don' t understand what people are afraid of. It' s like certain people can' t accept that we have sex or something. Oh don' t tell the kids, it' s a secret. We can' t teach them about biology when they ask. It' s better that they think the stork brought them.

It' s so ridiculous this whole thing. " The bleak tone of it all" . Seriously, there are a LOT of horror movies out there with extreme subjects. I agree with Rockstar on this one, adults should be able to choose for themselves just as with other forms of media.

ORIGINAL: Agent Ghost

HOW?
How would having sex in a game improve it in any way unless it' s a game about sex, which would have a AO rating anyway?

That' s an unfair question. A better way to ask it, would be to ask how would removing the content improve the game?

Easy answer. Profit. Game developers aren' t trying to make an artistict statement, they' re trying to make dollar.

If the explicit content was really that important to anyone, then the developers would accept the rating.

But explicit content in a game isn' t art, it' s a gimmick. When the gimmick is no longer profitable, it' s eliminated.

Easy answer. Profit. Game developers aren' t trying to make an artistict statement, they' re trying to make dollar.

If the explicit content was really that important to anyone, then the developers would accept the rating.

But explicit content in a game isn' t art, it' s a gimmick. When the gimmick is no longer profitable, it' s eliminated.

Its not that simple! Ofcourse they want profit. Do you think movies would include partial nudity steamy scenes if they knew they would be banned from release? That no one would buy them.

Rating boards should be shut down, parents shouldnt learn to look at what their kids play and watch.

Im glad things dont work like that here, but as it is, american sensorship will affect the game in the whole world, so there its hurting me again, and i cant even vote to change it.