Six weeks later: Rockstar fights back
by Andrew Yoon 
{ Aug 2nd 2007 at 8:00AM }
Six weeks after Manhunt 2's ban from the BBFC (and subsequently, an AO rating from the ESRB), Rockstar has finally formulated an appeal. The Video Appeals Committee (VAC) will have to analyze both the BBFC and Rockstar's position on the game, and choose whether or not to uphold the ban.It's good to see Rockstar finally fighting back: hopefully, gamers will be able to see the version of Manhunt 2 Rockstar intended to make all along -- not an edited version created to satiate the meek.
[Via 1UP]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Mike @ Aug 2nd 2007 8:13AM
Hell yeah!
podncunfused @ Aug 2nd 2007 9:35AM
Why are people who arent going to buy the game voicing their opinion? (also RE5 issue)
We as consumers have the right to buy or to not buy these products. I dont need someone telling me whats alright for me. if i wanted that i wouldn't live in america.
ps. where is the !go cam for america.?!?!
Jason B. @ Aug 2nd 2007 11:14AM
"2. Why are people who arent going to buy the game voicing their opinion?"
It is funny that you ask that question then mention your rights and living in America a couple of sentences down. Its called the first amendment. That is more of a right than your right to buy a videogame. Just because you aren't going to buy the game doesn't mean you can't have an opinion on it.
-----
Just because we live in a free society doesn't mean we don't have social responsibilites that everyone should adhere too. Just because we can do it, doesn't mean that we should. I applaud the BBFC and the ESRB in sticking to their responsibilities to the gaming public in not letting utter garbage with no redeeming traits or qualities be allowed just because of pressure from certain companies and so-called "mature" gamers. I hope the VAC and the ESRB have the balls to stand behind the decisions made a few weeks ago.
That is just my opinion. I am sure that I will get flamed for it.
Chris @ Aug 2nd 2007 11:26AM
This is big. The outcome of this will play a huge role in the rating of future games.
DiRT @ Aug 2nd 2007 11:58AM
I agree that while the First Amendment should allow Rockstar to make their game, it also doesn't prevent an AO rating nor companies from refusing to distribute it on their systems.
"It's good to see Rockstar finally fighting back: hopefully, gamers will be able to see the version of Manhunt 2 Rockstar intended to make all along -- not an edited version created to satiate the meek." is just snarky. Andrew Yoon should take time to step back and realize that he shouldn't speak on behalf the readers.
Zach S @ Aug 2nd 2007 12:05PM
I'm into really dark games and movies as much as the next guy, but personally, I'd be hesitant to play a game so brutal that it's getting an AO rating for it. Like, why would you WANT to play that? Do you need more gore and violence or something? It could be fun, definitely, and I'm still considering buying it if and when it comes out, but if it seems just like some vehicle for Rockstar's political agenda filled with blood and guts and crap that's just so unnecessarily violent or perverse, then forget it.
podncunfused @ Aug 2nd 2007 12:07PM
i know living in america means you have the freedom to say whatever you want, but if the game is unfit for you to play then let it sit on store shelves. if you don't like it, don't buy it. The fact that they want to tell me what to buy rubs me the wrong way. i understand there are ppl that cant separate themselves from animated violence and or (fantasy)but those are very few.
man hunt is a brutal game and in the wrong hands could make (sick ppl) even sicker. i think that what new york is doing should be applied everywhere. vendors should not sell there M rated games to children or mothers who's child is standing right next to her. Its a slippery slope and i agree with chris. this is going to get crazy.
iam positive more games are going to get pushed back. and more games wont see the light of day becuase they make someone uncomfortable.
mastershake3 @ Aug 2nd 2007 12:53PM
look, they have to rate the games correctly to protect the consumers. The stores have the right to sell what they want, (you wouldn't want to have someone say you have to sell something you don't agree with in YOUR store) that being said, capitalisim is nature. Survival of the fittest. Rockstar should simpply evolve when met with a challange. Sell it direct, and pass on the savings to the consumer. If it's a flop, they'll make different games. If it's a hit profit hungry merchants will carry it despite it's rating. Walmart censors cd's, but sells guns and cigarettes. Fry's sells porn. the stores that carry what we want will win.
I do feel bad for our troops however, thier options are often limited.
Neil @ Aug 2nd 2007 1:30PM
The first game wasn't very good, and I'm sure this one is going to be just as weak, so its really hard for me to care one way or the other. When morbid ways of killing people is your only selling point for your game I find it hard to find anything good to say about it.
cafecito @ Aug 2nd 2007 2:07PM
What a bunch of pussies. What, is it amish-opinion day or something?
I'd love to get this game. Uncut. There's violent content alright, but that's nothing we haven't seen already on the movies a gazillion times.
And what's sooo wrong about an AO rating? Sales? Cause I'm an adult and I know I'll get it anyway.
Mike @ Aug 2nd 2007 2:40PM
@ cafecito.. I agree 100% let it keep the AO rating I will buy it right away.
Strike009 @ Aug 2nd 2007 5:41PM
at everyone above who thinks its just senseless violence and smut:
your right. but what about hostel? the was rated r but should have been given an x rating for the violence. honestly if any of you manhunt critics have seen hostel or the hills have eyes 2 then your a hypocrit and your opinion is worthless.
mastershake3 @ Aug 3rd 2007 11:30AM
I might play this game, and want some AO titles. That being said, I don't think such ratings should be trivalised. Read "On Killing" by Lt. Col. Dave Grossman. An excellent read, and schools should ad it to the reading list.
You have the right to view what you want, as an adult. But if you bringing your child under 17 to Hostel II (where I saw 5 year olds) or 8mm (where I saw children ranging from 2-9!) you are irresponsible and deserve the violance in your neighborhood.
bryansurvive @ Aug 5th 2007 3:48PM
the first amendment is stupid lol.
yes both ways would start a war of weather or not we should be able to play this. but isnt that why we have ratings. its the job of stores to card people at any age to purchase this game. then the responsibility of the parents to decide if they allow it. that my opinion. there should be no reason why you should edit someone like that. its all just lack of responsibility.