×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Manhunt 2 Banned In Britain

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the wii-controls-make-it-that-much-squickier dept.

Censorship 593

westlake writes "Rockstar's Manhunt 2 has been banned in the U.K. for what the British Board of Film Classification calls its 'unrelenting focus on stalking and brutal slaying.' 'There is sustained and cumulative casual sadism in the way in which these killings are committed, and encouraged, in the game.' The company has six weeks to submit an appeal. The last game to be refused classification was Carmageddon in 1997. That decision was later overturned via the appeals process."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

593 comments

Its not going to work (1)

Stu101 (1031686) | more than 6 years ago | (#19565947)

Do they not realise all we have to do is fire up bittorent ?

Re:Its not going to work (5, Insightful)

MankyD (567984) | more than 6 years ago | (#19565971)

Do they not realise all we have to do is fire up bittorent ?
That doesn't help Rockstar.

Re:Its not going to work (1)

iainl (136759) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566083)

Cutting off the money supply is usually the most effective way to stop the flow of illegal product, so maybe that's part of the point...

Re:Its not going to work (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19566283)

hey, if the RIAA can claim that lost potential sales represent stolen income, perhaps Rockstar can use the same reasoning and invoice the BBFC for lost sales. It's not like Rockstar is some criminal enterprise asking to be paid to not commit crimes - the BBFC stops them selling their legitimately developed product, the BBFC should be on the hook for replacing lost profits.

They should at least be able to give the BBFC some pretty nasty PR about how its damaging their business for a few weeks.

Re:Its not going to work (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19566543)

Do they not realise all we have to do is fire up bittorent ?
Ssshhh... Don't say that! All the Government has to do is now is tell parents: "There's this evil thing on the internet called 'bittorrent' that can give access to your kids to the murder simulator Manhunt 2. Think of the children - ban bittorrent!"

Thanks for ruining bittorrent for the rest of us, asshole.

Re:Its not going to work (2, Insightful)

iainl (136759) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566001)

Or indeed a browser that can be pointed at an import website.

They can't stop all copies from reaching people. But they can significantly reduce the volume with these laws.

Or has your country decided that drug laws are pointless, too?

Re:Its not going to work (3, Interesting)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566055)

Or has your country decided that drug laws are pointless, too?


It isn't called the war on some drugs for nothing, you know...

Re:Its not going to work (5, Insightful)

bmw (115903) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566209)

I wouldn't exactly say these types of bans or things like drug laws are pointless. They just don't have the effect that a lot of people think. Making something that is in high demand illegal doesn't actually eliminate it from the population. All it does is change the distributors. Just look at our current drug laws and prohibition. These things exist because a large percentage of the population wants them to. Laws won't change that.

Re:Its not going to work (4, Insightful)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566427)

Hmm....is this a case of "Welcoming our Nanny-State Overlords"?

What is the deal here? While I don't have a problem with limiting access to children, why the fsck are they messsing around with content a GROWN ADULT might wish to play?? The US is starting to lean this way too which saddens me.

What's next....banning books that have too much violent, sadistic content? Sure its not as flashy as the video game, but, it still promotes the same messages....

Re:Its not going to work (5, Funny)

Volante3192 (953645) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566559)

What's next....banning books that have too much violent, sadistic content? Sure its not as flashy as the video game, but, it still promotes the same messages....

Pretty sure everyone would be up in arms against that one. I'm not a fan of the bible myself, but I hear I'm an exception...

Re:Its not going to work (3, Informative)

plague3106 (71849) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566423)

Yes, drug laws are pointless. At this point, all they do is increase the violence involved in the sale of illegal drugs. Yet you can still find them just about anywhere.

Games Banned But BushCo's (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19566153)

Wars [whitehouse.org] are covered daily on TV for the children ( a.k.a. tomorrow's drone soldiers ).

Sincerely,
X

Re:Its not going to work (0, Troll)

jandersen (462034) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566295)

This is not so much about whether it is going to work - they know that very well. It is a statement to say 'This is not acceptable here'; that is really what censorship is about in most cases. In this case I must say I can see the point; most people would find a game like that revolting, I believe, and would want the government to say that there has to be a limit. It's like pornography, most of it is harmless and simply boring, but some of it is too extreme to be tolerated by the large majority of people, and I think it is fair to ban it.

Freedom of speech is important, but we shouldn't be slaves to that phrase, becuse it does get used as an excuse for a lot of grotesque rubbish. Freedom of speech is there to protect people's right to express their political and religious opinions without fear of prosecution - those things are important in a democratic society - but it's not there to protect small minded idiots who want to make money on crap.

Re:Its not going to work (5, Insightful)

Irish_Samurai (224931) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566453)

You know, I really hate this perspective. It assumes that everyone agrees on what is offensive.

What about what I find offensive? The platitude ridden crap we get now is more offensive to me than some "snuff" game with no artistic merit. I love how these "small minded idiots" are branded as such based on no other criteria than creating something you disagree with. You may think you are voicing the opinion of reason, but its statements like yours that are more censorship favoring than anything else I tend to hear.

How about personal accountability for the media you consume?
How about making choices for yourself instead of assuming your opinion is the opinion?
How about understanding that majority opinion has been shown to be full of shit more than once?

Re:Its not going to work (1)

plague3106 (71849) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566483)

In this case I must say I can see the point; most people would find a game like that revolting, I believe, and would want the government to say that there has to be a limit. It's like pornography, most of it is harmless and simply boring, but some of it is too extreme to be tolerated by the large majority of people, and I think it is fair to ban it.

So you're basically saying that mob rule is just fine with you? Sorry, but just because a majority of people find something distasteful or offensive does not mean that society has the right to censor it. Perhaps we should ban the practice of voodoo as well, because I'm sure you can find quite a few people that find it wrong.

How about this instead: don't buy things you find offensive, and leave other people alone.

Re:Its not going to work (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19566521)

It's like pornography, most of it is harmless and simply boring, but some of it is too extreme to be tolerated by the large majority of people, and I think it is fair to ban it.

So what if something is too extreme to be tolerated by the large majority of people? If they don't tolerate it then they don't have to buy it. Problem solved, without interfering with other people's liberties.

Re:Its not going to work (1)

BlueTrin (683373) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566421)

No and they will never do, it is like saying that one of your non-IT colleague is a dumbass because he broke something on his comp: you cannot expect him to know about such things ... unfortunately not.

On the other side getting it via bittorrent is not a legal way to obtain the game. It is like saying that it is useless to fight against drugs by increasing the budget for border police because drug dealers always find some way to import drugs, it is partially true but it is still better than nothing.

Re:Its not going to work (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566441)

It is like saying that it is useless to fight against some drugs by increasing the budget for border police because drug dealers always find some way to import drugs, it is partially true but it is still better than nothing.


Fixed. Never forget kiddies, if it isn't taxed, it's bad for you!

Re:Its not going to work (2, Informative)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566531)

Manhunt was crap anyway. I got it because of all the fuss over it, to see what it was like. It was pretty repetetive and boring.. all the enemies were pretty much the same.. I did a few levels of it and just got bored. When I 'kill' things in computer games I don't tend to associate it with real life much anyway, I know it's just me calling the die function on an enemy object (or whatever), and I like stuff like ragdoll physics in deaths to make them more realistic etc, but that's more from an impressive coding or bodies in funny positions point of view. This game does sound a little depraved. People love that kinda stuff of course, but I could quite happily live my life without playing this game.. GTA IV I will definitely be getting, it's an amazing game and I like Rockstar as developers, but by the sounds of this.. what's the point? Of course it won't be as bad to play as they make it sound, but after buying Manhunt, I wouldn't waste any money on this.

How dare they! (5, Insightful)

godfra (839112) | more than 6 years ago | (#19565953)

If this game gets released for the PC I'm going to import it out of principle. Now, where did I leave my hammer again?

Re:How dare they! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19566319)

That's not really the point. You will still be able to get a copy of this game very easily (imported, ordered online, downloaded off P2P, etc.) However, the ban will destroy any chance of Rockstar turning a profit on game sales in Britain. That will mean that it wasn't worth their investment, and discourage them from developing such games in the future.

The EU is your friend! (1)

2008 (900939) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566433)

Import, people, import. It's a free market, and the game will be on sale in France/Italy/Netherlands etc. Generally, games in these markets are either completely untranslated (except the manual) or still have English available as an option.

I wasn't particularly interested in this game but will now certainly be buying it - aside from a simple anti-censorship protest I also want to know what's considered bad enough to get banned!

I love hearing about banned games... (5, Insightful)

bmw (115903) | more than 6 years ago | (#19565965)

It lets me know which ones to buy.

Yes... (1)

C10H14N2 (640033) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566183)

Because in a hundred years "Manhunt 2" will be remembered as 2007's "I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings" or "Of Mice and Men."

But, yeah, censorship is what it is, regardless of the relative worth of the item in question, which in this case is about zilch.

Great advertising.. (5, Interesting)

EveryNickIsTaken (1054794) | more than 6 years ago | (#19565967)

Manhunt 2, available soon in the US on the Wii...
GamePro gives it 8/10.
IGN rated 9.5/10.
British Board of Film Classification calls its 'unrelenting focus on stalking and brutal slaying.' 'There is sustained and cumulative casual sadism in the way in which these killings are committed, and encouraged, in the game.'

Re:Great advertising.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19566345)

"brutal slaying" only, So "frently slaying" is still ok.

wtf (1)

wizardforce (1005805) | more than 6 years ago | (#19565979)

distasteful maybe, responsible for murders no. The people that do such crimes are crazy psychos t begin with yet instead of blaming the damn psycho for what they do they blame the game they may or may not have played.

Re:wtf (1)

wanderingknight (1103573) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566109)

I wouldn't say they're all psychos. Many of them may have lived in an improper family circle, which didn't taught them properly the difference between reality and fantasy. Tagging them all as "psychos" is a short-sighted thing to do in my opinion.

Re:wtf (2, Informative)

Irish_Samurai (224931) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566165)

Many of them may have lived in an improper family circle, which didn't taught them properly the difference between reality and fantasy.

That would be the definition of psychotic. [google.com] .

Re:wtf (1)

revlayle (964221) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566193)

So if they do not know the difference between fantasy and reality, aren't they kind of, you know, "psycho"? (and probably "psycho" and in the generic term to refer to some some mentally no-right people).

Re:wtf (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19566267)

I wouldn't say they're all psychos. Many of them may have lived in an improper family circle, which didn't taught them properly the difference between reality and fantasy. Tagging them all as "psychos" is a short-sighted thing to do in my opinion.
[to me anyone who utterly destroys a human life is a psychopath.] yes, but what is going on here is that people instead of actually preventing crimes, are jumping on the closest scapegoat they can find. In this case, the game was easy to blame. it didn't matter to them if it wasn't being bought/downloaded somehow, that wasn't the point. they want people to think they are doing something, being proactive in solving the problem and no one is catching them on their nonsense.

Re:wtf (1)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566123)

The problem is that for that tiny minority of nut jobs out there, games like can help fuel their little deluded fantasies. Unfortunately that makes these games high visibility, easy targets so the system can pretend its doing something to protect society rather than working out how to do the hard bit which is identify and treat these nut jobs before they go postal.

The idea is dumb. (3, Insightful)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 6 years ago | (#19565997)

The very idea of banning ANYTHING entertainment-related in a 1st world country/area is completely stupid.

Any newscast will be covering events at least as horrible if not worse than anythin you will find in a video game. The difference is, when you hear about someone getting brutally murdered on the news, a person actually died.

I've always felt those that say videogames/movies/whatever that are too violent are the sick ones, for they apparently cannot discern fantasy from reality.

Re:The idea is dumb. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19566311)

The very idea of banning ANYTHING entertainment-related in a 1st world country/area is completely stupid.

Like child porn?

Re:The idea is dumb. (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566359)

Forgive me for not spelling out the obvious. I would hope that you, as a human, have the ability to tell what is meant by a statement.

I'll remember to make a really long, drawn out novel next time.

Re:The idea is dumb. (4, Insightful)

Traa (158207) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566445)

The very idea of banning ANYTHING entertainment-related in a 1st world country/area is completely stupid.

The key here is "entertainment-related". So where do you draw the line when games cross from entertainment into objectionable content? Which of the following do you consider harmless fun if depicted in a video game:

killing monsters
killing people
killing cops
clubbing baby seals
sadism
extreme brutal violence
sex
porn
kiddie porn
snuff

For me, there are a few things on that list that I have no problem with if they are banned. There is no entertainment value to be gotten from them except for people who need help.

Re:The idea is dumb. (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566525)

Honestly, the only thing in there for me would be kiddie porn, and that's only because children are too young to know what they were doing.

There is no entertainment value to be gotten from them except for people who need help.


Based on the number of people that are currently seeing psychologists on a monthly/weekly/daily basis, that would imply the market for it is rather huge. Beyond that though, never forget one thing: the outlet for your frustration and anger is NOT the same as everyone elses. Many people would find The David offensive simply because he is naked...even though it is one of the most important artworks of our entire human history.

I'm not comparing Manhunt to The David, I'm simply stating that one man's trash is another man's treasure.

Fantasy v. Reality (1)

shis-ka-bob (595298) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566575)

There is strong evidence that exposure to violence, even in a 'fantasy setting', desensitizes real people to violence. I don't care what anyone does to a movie or video character (fiction), but I do care if a violent game/move results in measurable increases in violence in the real world. As I understand the literature in the field (which is limited because I am not an expert in psychology/sociology/psychiatry ), these really are correlated and this correlation suggest that some movies/video games can be reasonably expected to result in harm to real people. I wish this wasn't true, but I am not so dogmatic as to ignore data that contradicts my prejudices. At the very least, there are two sides to this issue.

I do agree with you about news. Occasionally, there are news events that I feel should not be shown at times when children can reasonably be expected to be present. I did call the new office (you really can get through to network newsrooms on the phone) and complain bitterly when the morning news had a report that a certain cannibal preferred asparagus with severed penis. Parents should reasonably expect to allow children to watch news and I think this this sort of news story is almost completely salacious.

Will it help? (4, Insightful)

saibot834 (1061528) | more than 6 years ago | (#19565999)

The question is: will it help? In Germany they also have a big controversy about violence in computer games (they call it "killergames" / de: "Killerspiele"). But the politicians don't ask them self if banning a computer game stops the users from using it. If the children can't buy it at the store, they'll just download it from the bittorent or edonkey network. And if they don't have an internet connection, they copy it from their friends. Children are not stupid.

Another question is: is this appropriate? I can truly understand that the politicians don't want to promote violence in games, but it's one thing to not like something and a complete other thing to ban/censor something.

Re:Will it help? (1)

wanderingknight (1103573) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566261)

The thing is, it's the responsibility of the goddamn family to watch over what the kid does, or at least to teach him what the hell does a game mean and its difference with real life. I played "killer games" my whole goddamn life (I remember playing Marathon with my dad when I was 6) and I'm not going out there shooting people.

Re:Will it help? (5, Insightful)

glesga_kiss (596639) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566291)

If the children can't buy it at the store, they'll just download it from the bittorent or edonkey network.

And the best way to make children want something is to tell them that they cannot have it.

Wasn't there problems with Manhunt in Britain too? (5, Informative)

TheThiefMaster (992038) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566029)

From the Wikipedia article for Manhunt [wikipedia.org] :

In the UK, the game was linked to the murder of Stefan Pakeerah, 14, by his friend Warren Leblanc, 17. Giselle Pakeerah, the victim's mother, claimed that Leblanc had been 'obsessed' with the game after the former pleaded guilty in court. During the subsequent media circus, the game was removed from sale by some vendors, such as the UK and international branches of GAME and Dixons, leading to "significantly increased" demand both from retailers and on internet auction sites. The police denied any such link between the game and the murder however, citing drug-related robbery as the motive. The presiding judge also placed sole responsibility with Leblanc in his summing up after awarding him a life sentence. GAME have since returned Manhunt to their shelves, after it transpired that the murderer did not even own or ever play the game. It was apparently the victim who owned a copy of Manhunt, even though he was under 18.

Re:Wasn't there problems with Manhunt in Britain t (1)

jimicus (737525) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566101)

If someone's so mentally unstable that they might conceivably go out and kill someone after playing a violent video game, perhaps the problem is with their mental stability than the videogame.

Re:Wasn't there problems with Manhunt in Britain t (1)

MeanderingMind (884641) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566105)

So despite the fact that the murderer never owned or played the game, the parents of the victim still blame the game for their son's death.

I thought the standard for when bad things happen without an apparent reason was to blame God. That at least makes some sense, rather than some video game that the killer never played.

Re:Wasn't there problems with Manhunt in Britain t (1)

Kadin2048 (468275) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566225)

So despite the fact that the murderer never owned or played the game, the parents of the victim still blame the game for their son's death.

Well, yeah. I mean, the alternative is the truth, which is that their little angel got killed in a drug deal gone bad, when he was presumably still living in their house, under their care. Oops.

Much easier to blame it on the big bad video games.

Re:Wasn't there problems with Manhunt in Britain t (1)

bri2000 (931484) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566393)

There's a fairly sick tendency in the British press to exploit murders (especially murders of children or young people) to make political points. From what I remember of this case (from an analysis of it in Private Eye a couple of years back) a reporter for the Sun approached the parents and made a lot of false claims to them about the killer and the game which led to him getting the quotes he wanted which allowed him to write the anti-video games story his editor wanted. And, of course, under the bizarre rules of newspaper evidence, quotes from the victim's family (even if obtained under false pretences) trump any statements from the police or the court trying to set the record straight so it is now an accepted part of British tabloid newpaper lore that Manhunt caused a murder.

See also the attempts to blame the James Bulger murder on the movie Childplay even though there was no evidence (outside the fevered imaginations of tabloid editors) that the killers had even seen the film.

Re:Wasn't there problems with Manhunt in Britain t (1)

plague3106 (71849) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566545)

No you have it all wrong. Its always a PERSON that is to blame when things go wrong, but you must always PRAISE god for anything that goes right. Only the good things are his doing.

Nevermind that he created the devil.

Re:Wasn't there problems with Manhunt in Britain t (4, Funny)

Smight (1099639) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566119)

So you're saying that even knowing someone who owns manhunt can turn you into a killer?

Re:Wasn't there problems with Manhunt in Britain t (5, Insightful)

@madeus (24818) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566293)

Yep, and both parents of the murdered 14 year old said they used to play it together (which the police said was not true and went out of their way to state very clearly it wasn't a factor as the killer had never played it, that newspaper reports to the contrary were incorrect and that the motive was robbery).

Yet still both parents of the victim hold the game responsible - even though the only person involved who owned or had played a copy was the victim! They have not explained why their 14 year old child was allowed this 18 certificate game when they thought it was so deplorable - however they have the nerve to accuse Rockstar of being irresponsible. Given by their own admission, they were blatantly aware their 14 year old had this 18 certificate game and used to let him play it, that's somewhat ironic. I fully expect they even bought it for him.

Of course, the press (The Sun, The Mirror, GMTV, The BBC) didn't bother to correct their stories when it transpired they had been grossly misreporting the story for months (even after the police had been very clear in saying what the press was reporting was incorrect).

Re:Wasn't there problems with Manhunt in Britain t (1)

@madeus (24818) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566371)

Oh, and there are some really choice quotes from the (understandably) distraught parents that make a big deal of how "evil" the killer was and how he was specifically evil because he was deceptive and that was the "worst kind of evil". Considering they committed perjury by making false statements in court (in addition to reciting them to the press) that strikes me as a bit rich.

Re:Wasn't there problems with Manhunt in Britain t (1)

jagdish (981925) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566379)

... the victim's mother, claimed that Leblanc had been 'obsessed' with the game after the former pleaded guilty in court.
What was the basis of her accusation? Was it misinformation by the news media.

I wonder if the movie industry had gone through a similar phase in its early days?

Fun with Censorship (1)

MeanderingMind (884641) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566031)

Somehow, I can't help but think this is an overreaction and even unfair.

I didn't enjoy the first Manhunt. This is partly due to the initial description a friend of mine gave. I was under the impression it was a far more open game than it was. The gameplay simply wasn't fun for me, snuff genre aside.

However, I wouldn't for a moment consider banning the game. Violent, yes. Gruesome, yes. Morally dubious, yes. However, so are lots and lots of movies, books, and the news. There are plenty of movies I've seen in theatres at an R rating I'd consider far more disturbing and vicious than Manhunt.

Unless there's concrete proof that Manhunt 2 causes cancer, murder, or the death of many kittens at the hand of God I don't believe it should be banned. Restricted from the reach of minors? Definately. But not outright banned.

What is the point? (0, Flamebait)

mulvane (692631) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566057)

Can anyone give me a valid reason why games like this should even be produced? I'm all for violence in video games as long as the violence doesn't portray actual acts. I remember when I was younger and had a intellivsion, then an atari 2600, C64, Tandy CoCo2, NES, SNES, and all the way up to my first pentium. Up till that point, it seemed games were about being fun, and exploring ones mind with a vast majority of the games. Now its just about how many people you can kill before you are gunned down yourself.
Do we really need this kind of reckless abandon in our games? Sure I understand games are not the cause, but with the great majority of people suffering more and more mental illnesses for whatever reason, do you want someone already on the edge to have this material?

Re:What is the point? (2, Interesting)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566161)

I can give you a valid reason. Many people (myself included) are angry people, yet we understand and acknowledge that just because we WANT to do something doesn't mean that we SHOULD. If you ever read JTHM from Jhonnen Vasquez, he has said in an interview that JTHM represents things he has wanted to do to people, but he KNOWS that he shouldn't do them. So, as a way of venting his frustration and anger with society, he draws an overly violent comic which, at the same time, has some of the most important and insightful social commentary I have ever read.

Games like Manhunt/Manhunt 2 provide an outlet for those feelings. Yes, I could lift weights (which I do) or play sports (which I don't), but my outlets of choice are music and videogames.

People always talk about how videogames push people over the edge and make them murderers. They never stop to think that maybe the videogames help keep people in check by providing a harmless outlet for their anger.

Re:What is the point? (1)

mulvane (692631) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566215)

I'm not against violence like I said..But I used to enjoy doom style games for that. I knew it was fantasy sure, but there is a certain satisfaction to killing a demon.

I agree (1)

2DGamer (980565) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566475)

I'm with you on this one. I don't think it's the violence as much as how that violence affects you. I have played plenty of violent games in the past, but how I felt after I was finished varied greatly between genres. Blowing up countless alien ships (rest their soul) in a shmup vs. blowing heads off in games like Soldier of Fortune causes very different physiological and psychological responses in me. I no longer play modern games simply because they have turned into something that I no longer consider fun.

Re:What is the point? (1)

Assassin_Caleb (1117477) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566273)

yeah, It's better taking things out on video game than people.

Re:What is the point? (1)

mulvane (692631) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566333)

Not to mention the fact that as a society most of our kids are glued to the screen playing video games non-stop. Till I moved out into the country away from everything and my children now have mass expanses of area to SAFELY play outside, I had a hard time getting my oldest son to do something besides play video games. Now I am supposed to allow him vent time because he had a hard day at school before he does his homework?

Re:What is the point? (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566413)

When you get home from work, what do you do? Do you ever watch TV? Smoke a cig? Maybe have a beer? Read the paper? Take a dump?

Everyone has something they do to unwind at the end of the day. EVERY. SINGLE. PERSON. To answer your question, yes, you should allow your son vent time. If you were to be an integrel part of that vent time, not only would you understand your son better, but he would understand you better as well.

By all means, give your son vent time.

Re:What is the point? (1)

mulvane (692631) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566585)

I've posted this before, but my son's homework time is family time. Me and my wife sit down with him, help him with his homework, explain alternatives to get same result, and or just generally explain why something is and why it has to be that way. His teachers are not overly fond that he doesn't always do it there way but the way he understands best, but they say they appreciate the time we take to help him learn. My son can think, and that's not thanks to schools. I largely contribute his prowess to video games. I pushed video games on him early to help with his fine motor skills due to him having mild cerebral palsy. I understand kids especially needing to vent but I don't think him playing a violent video game killing people for sport is the venting anyone needs. What happens when the game isn't available?

Re:What is the point? (1)

Assassin_Caleb (1117477) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566473)

well thats how the latest generation is, you can't fight it, he can learn just as much playing video games like online games, working as teams, tactics and stuff like that, which can improve intelligence, people skills and life skills, its not all bad

Re:What is the point? (1)

mario64 (573112) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566395)

My son was always getting into trouble at school for starting fights (got very close to being excluded). Then I let him loose on some of my PC games to get some of the aggression out of his system. Over a short period of time he got into less and less trouble and is now doing a lot better with his studies and hardly ever gets into fights.
He now saves up all his frustration and anger for games and is a better person for it. Banning him from playing violent games would leave him with no release except for fighting at school...

I think someone needs to re-do their study into game violence and it's effects, not just looking at the very small number of people who Kill (that happen to have played a comuter game in the past).

Re:What is the point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19566569)

Please seek help.

Re:What is the point? (3, Interesting)

FreeKill (1020271) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566301)

You confusing the poor graphics of those systems with a lack of violence, there were plenty of violent games on those old machines. River City Ransom, Double Dragon, Wolfenstein 3D, Duke Nukem. The difference is that now the systems are actually capable of creating realistic environments, but the games are just recreating the same game play you had fun with back on the old systems. I think people should have the right to decide if they want to play manhunt or not.

Re:What is the point? (2, Insightful)

MeanderingMind (884641) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566303)

It's a matter of creative freedom. It is very hard to draw concrete lines on what should and should not be censored, especially when everyone is of different opinions. What you consider an abomination of violence and brutality might be someone else's reminder that life is not all roses and rainbows.

The possibility exists that some unstable person will get a hold of these games and go ballistic, but similar arguments have been made about all media over the years. It's the "corrupting our youth" fallacy. Even in a utopia free from any violent media or influences, there's no guarantee that peace itself won't act as a catalyst for some unstable psycho's massacre.

We minimize censorship because of an implicit understanding that everyone is different. We're allowed to judge for ourselves what we should and shouldn't consume. That some people are unable to make that call is a fault of other aspects of society, not the media it produces.

Re:What is the point? (3, Insightful)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566331)

Can anyone give me a valid reason why games like this should even be produced?
Because some people enjoy playing games like it.

Seriously, I think you have your priorities backwards... we should be concerned about the validity of measures taken to repress freedom, not concerned about the validity of one way in which people choose to express it.

Re:What is the point? (1)

Irish_Samurai (224931) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566343)

Do you want to tell me when I have to go to bed too?

Seriously, do you think your opinion of tasteful/necessary/allowable levels of violence/sex/drug references/(taboo material) in games/movies/books/TV is the litmus test that we should go by?

I'll give you a reason. I'm a reality grounded, well educated young man who loves the Walter Mitty aspects these games allow me. I don't want to really experience clearing a room full of terrorists like in Rainbow Six:Vegas - but I sure as hell have fun playing with the scenario. I also don't want to fight Zombies or Vampires in real life, but these damn games sure are cool.

To subjugate the populace to watered down media materials because you think it could help prevent violent outbreaks is ridiculous. The only thing it will do is cut down on the number of times that a specific media type can be labeled the trigger for such an event.

Re:What is the point? (1)

mulvane (692631) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566481)

You reference Rainbow 6 and Zombies and Vampires.. Like I mentioned, I'm not against violence. I am against popularizing it being cool to take a real life scenario like murder, and rape, and pimping. You say you are grounded, but look outside at most of todays youth. I have a 22 (brother-in-law) year old for instance (I am 29) I have to raise because he can't get his ass in gear and do the right thing. This punk has threatened to beat my ass cause he feels that just mowing my yard is equal to room/board for a month. I don't want to make this sound like a stereo-type, but all of his friends (I know of 30+ personally) are all the same. They find it fine to live in there cars, or in one instance, sleep on my porch until I woke up and found them. These aren't grounded individuals, and I would like to say they are a shrinking minority, but that isn't the case. These kids are having kids and raising them with the same values. These are the ones imo are susceptible to going over the edge and slipping into a reality these games offer and taking it away afterwards.

Re:What is the point? (1)

ifrag (984323) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566405)

Now its just about how many people you can kill before you are gunned down yourself.
So, how is something like "TRON: Deadly Discs" any different? I thought a lot of those games were more crazy than things are now because there was simply no way to win. Eventually the difficulty level would rise beyond human capability and at some point you would die. There was no escaping it, in fact I think many of those old atari games literally had no "win" conditions. It just simply ramped things up indefinitely.

Re:What is the point? (1)

wizardforce (1005805) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566431)

Can anyone give me a valid reason why games like this should even be produced?
well my question is to you, who determines what can and can not be produced? this game for being to violent or a game that the powers that be don't like? do you think it is a good idea to entrust the people who believe that videogames are the sole cause of such violenceto be deciding what does and doesn't get produced?

Sure I understand games are not the cause, but with the great majority of people suffering more and more mental illnesses for whatever reason, do you want someone already on the edge to have this material?
first of all, it isn't that there are more people with mental illnesses, we are just getting better at knowing who has these disorders. second, it isn't the games themselves that I want away from them, I want to know who it is that is likely to cause the crimes and consequently be more aware. censoring games is a lazy excuse to try and look like you're solving a problem with the minimum amount of effort. why not instead of censoring things, try actually treeating mental illnesses so people don't go off killing each other for real?

Re:What is the point? (1)

Floritard (1058660) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566471)

Some people like Madden, other people play the Sims. Some people like stalking around a highly-fortified mansion avoiding heavily-armed personal security on a white-knuckled bloodlusting virtual vendetta to kill an evil sadistic, life-shattering, family-murdering, Brian-Cox-voiced madman in sweet cold-blooded revenge. Some people like Animal Crossing...

Re:What is the point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19566487)

Your memory betrays you. The C64 had Teacherbusters, Beachhead, Commando Lybia and more.

Re:What is the point? (0)

Lissajous (989738) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566553)

Can anyone give me a valid reason why games like this should even be produced?
Umm...that would be because lots of well-adjusted individuals who can separate fantasy from reality actually enjoy games like this. It's called freedom of choice. You choose not to play these games, others do. What's next on the banlist - a game [wikipedia.org] where you have to check the coast is clear before you kill someone and hide the body, or maybe a book [bible.cc] where the same thing is described.

Do we really need this kind of reckless abandon in our games?
Yes - it's cathartic [m-w.com] .

with the great majority of people suffering more and more mental illnesses for whatever reason, do you want someone already on the edge to have this material?
(a) It's not the great majority - it may, however be an increasing minority. These games, however, are in all probability not the cause of this increase.
(b) No - I want them to have the proper treatment, not to be pumped full of drugs, shunned by the state and thrown out onto the streets. Arrange the order as appropriate.

Re:What is the point? (4, Insightful)

Kadin2048 (468275) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566597)

Sure I understand games are not the cause, but with the great majority of people suffering more and more mental illnesses for whatever reason, do you want someone already on the edge to have this material?

I'm honestly not sure I care. I don't want my society being made into some sort of padded room for the "fragile" people. If some people can't take certain forms of entertainment, then they, or their caretakers if they're not competent to care for themselves, need to steer themselves away from it. It's that simple.

If you're offended by something, or worse, if something makes you more likely to do something bad/violent/criminal, then you have a responsibility to keep yourself away from it. People do stupid shit when they're intoxicated, but they don't get a free pass because they're drunk -- they chose to ingest alcohol, and are still responsible for their actions. Similarly, "the videogame made me do it" isn't an excuse, either. (Actually, it's far less of one than even the alcohol is.)

Society shouldn't be censored for children or the mentally ill.

BBC bias is largely to blame. (5, Informative)

Xest (935314) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566069)

What the BBC report fails to mention is that the copy of Manhunt involved in the Stephen Pakeerah case was actually owned by the murdered boy not the murderer - this is something that was acknowledged by the police.

Whilst the BBC report mentions that the police have come forward to say that the game had no impact on the killing, it's sad that they omit the very fact that frees the game from any blame, that as mentioned above, the victim owned the game. To me this suggests that they were clutching at straws to find an example of why the game should indeed be banned, and when unable to find one figured they'd use the next best thing and omit the facts that would negate the use of this example.

Of course, it was only yesterday we were hearing about how the BBC has a serious bias problem in it's reporting, so it really comes as no suprise. It's just a shame that only a day later they insist on proving their fault with the fact they once more publish half truths and bring up an irrelevant murder to try and justify the ban.

I'd argue, that the whole reason Manhunt 2 has been banned is not because there is a problem with the game as such, but because the BBFC felt it had no choice due to the public uproar various anti-video game media establishments like the BBC have produced - you only have to look at this weeks Panorama for a top notch example of the problem. How could the BBFC allow a game to be published, that as far as the general public know is responsible for a murder? It's hard to blame the BBFC on this one but easy to see that the British media is the real problem here.

Re:BBC bias is largely to blame. (1)

john83 (923470) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566269)

I'd argue, that the whole reason Manhunt 2 has been banned is not because there is a problem with the game as such, but because the BBFC felt it had no choice due to the public uproar various anti-video game media establishments like the BBC have produced - you only have to look at this weeks Panorama for a top notch example of the problem.
Panorama's gone to hell since it became weekly. That shift is an example of one of the main causes of shoddy journalism today - overworked journos trying to meet deadlines, leaving no time to do any proper investigative reporting.

The Nanny State Strikes Again ... (5, Insightful)

Syncerus (213609) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566089)

Well, England is a country that believes firmly that firearms cause murder and that the best way to promote civil rights is to have 100,000 cameras filming the public at all times. Whatever happened to punishing the guilty and letting the rest of us move on with our lives? You can't protect people from themselves.

Nobody needs the government to tell them what games to play. They're just games, and what people do after playing the game is THEIR responsibility. No video game is going to MAKE someone commit a murder. It's FANTASY and a healthy way to release aggression in a harmless way. Sigh.

I love Britain, and have visited many times; but they look like they are heading down the slow road to Hell.

Re:The Nanny State Strikes Again ... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19566259)

This is why I hate articles about Britain being posted on Slashdot. We can expect 1,000 smug Americans *sighing* with mock sympathy about our nanny / fascist / police state. Why did you bring firearms in to this debate? No English person (of sound mind) would wish it to be even EASIER for kids to get guns than it arleady is. The logic that applies in America simply doesn't apply here.

I'm British - I'm disgusted by this banning, but it's not the end of civilisation. But what I don't understand is this: when it is reported that there are nMillion CCTV cameras in London, you get endless sanctimonious, George-Orwell-quoting replies, usually the effect of 'I feel sorry for you - you're not free like us here in America'. So I suppose then, that the PATRIOT act is just a unique blend of freedom? I sincerely hope that gets banned alongside this game =-)

Re:The Nanny State Strikes Again ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19566337)

They do not have firearms related murders or incidents anymore, much like most other countries. It's only in crazy USA that they have so many gun murders each day.
Guns are gone from most civilized countries, just get over it.
USA only needed guns back in the 1700s.

Re:The Nanny State Strikes Again ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19566485)

Unless you count the shootings happening all over the UK. Then other civilized countries are still have problems with gun crime.

I wouldn't call it "healthy" (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19566385)

"It's FANTASY and a healthy way to release aggression in a harmless way."

Whatever happened to physical activity as a way to release aggression? I don't think these games make people into killers, but they sure help turn them into deconditioned tubs of lard. Get away from the monitor and spend the time exercising.

Re:The Nanny State Strikes Again ... (1)

ultrasound (472511) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566555)

I love Britain, and have visited many times; but they look like they are heading down the slow road to Hell.

I assume that you are from the US. I think perhaps you are rather further down the road to Hell than Britain, particularly with respect to violent crimes, the odd gun massacre and a disproportionate number of crazys.

Just because it is fantasy does not make it harmless, for example [bbc.co.uk] . Maybe you would argue that such censorship is another infraction of your civil rights. However there are some seriously sick people out there who inhabit the darker parts of the internet and who are not always capable of separating fantasy from reality. Do you think their behavior should go unchecked in order to protect your freedom? So that you can own fully-automatic machine guns and spend your evening on your PC massacring virtual prostitutes?

The point is: that you can't protect people from themselves, but I am very much in favour of protecting the rest of the population from the nutcases [wikipedia.org] .

Better than Clockwork Orange? (2, Interesting)

pembo13 (770295) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566093)

Is Manhunt 2 better than Clockwork Orange? Because I liked that movie. Hope Manhunt 2 comes out for Wii.

Re:Better than Clockwork Orange? (1)

mccalli (323026) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566169)

Clockwork Orange was never banned in the UK, it was withdrawn as a self-imposed gesture by Kubrick himself. You'll notice that the moment he died, Clockwork Orange was available for sale in the UK again.

Cheers,
Ian

What's the point? (1)

corifornia (995298) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566155)

Ive played violent video games all my life, and despite my urge to pull someone from a car and beat them with a tire iron ( i live in LA), I haven't because of this thing called law, and a tad bit of moral principal I suppose.

The thing (as someone mentioned above), at least here in the states, I can see things just as violent from turning on the evening news! Ever notice how news doesn't have an MA-17 rating?

And whats with banning it? There is a rating on the damn box. If a parent buys it for their child, then they are a bad parent (shame on them.), but it is their child and they can raise them as they see fit. If a store sells it to a child and the PARENT is upset, then do something to the company. I'm positive most retail game chains have some sort of strong policy against selling adult content to minors.

So lets think "of the children." Whats better for them play a video game or letting them watch REAL people get brutally slayed on television every night?

What use would it be (1)

present_arms (848116) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566157)

downloading the Wii version? I just tried Wii Sports in my dvd rw and it can't read the disc, same other way the Wii can't read cd's or dvd's just askin' Alie

They just don't understand (3, Informative)

Junior J. Junior III (192702) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566179)

"Rockstar's Manhunt 2 has been banned in the U.K. for what the British Board of Film Classification calls its 'unrelenting focus on stalking and brutal slaying.'


But that's what makes it FUN!

Irresponsible Parents (4, Insightful)

bestinshow (985111) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566253)

The issue is that the game will be played by people under the age of 18, even if they can't buy it. Leaving aside the matter of downloading the game from the internet, most parents seem happy to buy games rated 18 for their 12-17 year old offspring without a second thought.

Ratings on games are ignored far more (and by a larger age gap) than ratings on movies. Probably because of the word 'game'. Even if the stores hold up the game's rating at the point of sale, the parents will still go and buy their kid the game for them.

This is the situation in the murder case - the parent's bought their 14 year old sun an 18 certificate game. Aside from that irresponsible act, it had nothing to do with the child's death unless he was goading on a drug addled thug with themes from the game.

99% of kids of 14+ can handle 18 films and games without an issue I'd hazard a guess. However that other 1% can cause a lot of issues, hence the ratings.

I'm totally against bans however. I think the game should be made available, but not via the usual routes. Sell it in sex shops, so adults can buy it, but they'll stop and think about why their getting their 12 year old kid something from a sex shop. If they're happy to buy their kid things from a sex shop, then quite clearly the game isn't the issue at fault anyway.

Re:Irresponsible Parents (1)

Sciros (986030) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566403)

LOL are you serious? Sex shops? I think you should also register to vote in sex shops. And also perhaps enlist for the military there while you're at it. It'll be a "one stop shop" :rolleyes:

Nevermind that in the US the general policy is 17+ for "mature" games and movies but 18+ for adult-rated content, so that doesn't even make sense outside of the UK.

Carmageddon was fun. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19566255)

That says it all, doesn't it?

Carmageddon (4, Interesting)

Glacial Wanderer (962045) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566305)

Best physics
Best scoring system
Best audio
Best gameplay

Very possibly the best game ever! I think my entire floor in the dorms got addicted to this game (yes, it was an all male floor at an engineering school). I never would have guessed that senseless exaggerated violence with a buggy rubber band physics system could have been so much fun.

Re:Carmageddon (1)

Artaxs (1002024) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566461)

The last game to be refused classification was Carmageddon in 1997. That decision was overturned on appeal.
...and who can forget the "Curtains of Beef" level? Oh, the memories....

They forget the old saying... (1)

rosie_bhjp (40538) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566529)

When you outlaw the electro pedestrian bastard rays, only outlaws will have the electro pedestrian bastard rays!

Remember the Parents Music Resource Center? (1)

HockeyPuck (141947) | more than 6 years ago | (#19566593)

Anybody remember the senate hearing from the '80s in which the Tipper Gore lead "Parents Music Resource Center" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parents_Music_Resourc e_Center [wikipedia.org] tried to ban 20 or so albums due to excessive sex/violence in Rock music? They ended up putting a big black sticker that said "May contain..." which eventually became a beacon to kids to buy the album.

I welcome a new "Tipper Sticker" as now I'll know which games to buy.

To quote Dee Snider,

"The full responsibility for defending children falls on the shoulders of my wife and I, because there is no one else capable of making these judgments for us."
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...