BBFC denies political pressure

By Games Industry.biz Published 19 June, 2007

Nothing to do with Manhunt ban.

The BBFC has stated that there was no political influence in the decision to ban Rockstar's Manhunt 2 from sale in the UK, GamesIndustry.biz is reporting.

The original Manhunt caused a media frenzy following release when it was unfairly linked by the press to the murder of teenager Stefan Pakeerah.

The UK games industry was forced to defend itself at the time from various media outlets, with ELSPA's director general Roger Bennett coming face-to-face with Pakeerah's parents on national TV - while publisher Rockstar remained characteristically aloof.

However, the BBFC's Sue Clark has told GamesIndustry.biz that past incidents have not influenced the decision to deny the sequel to UK consumers.

"That had nothing to do with this decision, absolutely not," said Clark.

"We are independent of government and independent of the industry and we reached this decision based on our guidelines and our concerns and not on any other basis at all," she said.

Recent research by the BBFC showed that negative press surrounding controversial games actually encourages sales. A UK ban of Manhunt 2 would not be able to stop dedicated consumers importing copies on release.

"We've rejected this game so you can't buy it legally in the UK," added Clark.

"We have to make a decision. If we feel it's not appropriate for classification then we have to make that decision - we can't classify it and hope nobody notices it."

The BBFC has recently supported the release of a number of violent videogames despite the titles attracting controversy, including Rockstar's Canis Canem Edit and Capcom's Dead Rising.

Picture of Games.

About Games Industry.biz

Read more articles from Games by visiting the Games Industry.biz archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (147) Latest comment 5 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • kangarootoo #1 5 years ago

    This thread can kiss my ass. My fingers are getting tired :)

  • Bennicus #2 5 years ago

    And the last thing we want to do is promote young people!

  • bushwod #3 5 years ago

    @lavalant

    couldn't agree more. I have heard nothing in the description of this game to suggest it is anyworse than other forms of media dealing with the same subject.

  • promoted2001 #4 5 years ago

    Watched hostel 2 last night... Holy crap! Their banning Manhunt 2 over that?! Cutting someones bollox off is ok then?!

  • DDevil #5 5 years ago

    I find the BBFC to be very fair. If they're saying Manhunt 2 is too violent to release as it currently stands then I respect that decision.

  • muftak #6 5 years ago

    "Watched hostel 2 last night... Holy crap! Their banning Manhunt 2 over that?! Cutting someones bollox off is ok then?! "

    you sort of missed the point watching is different to performing the action (like what was planned in the Wii).

    im sorry but this game would have been shit just like the 1st no fuss

  • bioreit #7 5 years ago

    @ lavalant and @ bushwod

    Shut up, get a clue. This has little to do with the BBFC treating games as intrinsically different to movies and books.

    As mentioned in the other thread, movies in particular - especially 'Hostel' which you seem so fond of wheeling out - are much more strictly controlled at points of sale and rental, in shops, cinemas and shops such as Blockbuster.

    Therefore, the BBFC has to take into account the fact that little 6 year old Johnny is far, far more likely to get his hands on an 18-rated Manhunt 2 than sneak his way into the local Odeon and watch Hostel. Once the retail-games industry actually pulls its finger out and behaves responsibly, enforcing the LAW, then the BBFC would probably allow a game like Manhunt 2.

    Unless, of course, the content was actually so depraved they couldn't justify it under any circumstances. I mean, after all, they HAVE played the game through, whereas both of you have not.

    Amazing how that doesn't stop you from being experts on it though, isn't it?

  • octo #8 5 years ago

    Really, banning things and censorship is not the answer. I don't particularly care for manhunt, but I have no wish to see a game banned from sale. If you cannot control the point of sale then do something about that. Don't ban the game because you don't like the content.

  • playgen #9 5 years ago

    "Once the retail-games industry actually pulls its finger out and behaves responsibly, enforcing the LAW, then the BBFC would probably allow a game like Manhunt 2."

    Its not really the shops fault, but parents. I worked in a games shop and so many times I would tell parents an 18 game isn't suitable for their 8 year old or whatever, sometimes they would listen, but most would insist on you selling them the game. Legally you can't refuse to sell the game to the parent, and it's surprsing how many of them kicked up a right fuss at your suggestion that they shouldnt buy it.

    If anything needs to be done its TV ad's educating parents of what 18 rated games are really like. Then parents who wouldn't dream of letting their kids watch 18 movies might actually realise 18 games arent suitable either.
    Edited by 1 at 19/06/07 @ 16:36

  • AcidSnake #10 5 years ago

    @muftak:
    Stop using the past tense...
    Just because the UK won't sell it doesn't mean it doesn't exist...

  • secombe #11 5 years ago

    Watched hostel 2 last night... Holy crap! Their banning Manhunt 2 over that?! Cutting someones bollox off is ok then?!

    Do you actually see everything that is in the movie? By that I mean, do you ACTUALLY see a mans testicles being cut off? I've found time and time again that so-called horrific movies actually imply more than they show, yet are clever enough to make the viewer think that they actually viewed everything in specific detail. If you study the first Hostel enough then you will notice that you actually see very little.

    I dont like manhunt but it proves the BBFC dont class games in the same boat as movies

    You've seen enough of Manhunt 2 to make a decision on this then, I presume? They are treated in the same way, but as a rule I would suggest that games don't really work on the story/message/art as much as many films. From reading the BBFC statement it sounds like Manhunt 2 is violence for violence sake with absolutely no deviation from that. Very very few films ever go that far, most put it in a wider context at the very least. Sure films like Hostel are pushing the boundaries, but even that (apparently) has some interesting subtext.

  • Bleedingplums #12 5 years ago

    Had no real intention to buy this game after the first one turned out to be shit.

    Now I'll go to the ends of the earth to play it and find out what all the fuss is about.

  • remote #13 5 years ago

    "Therefore, the BBFC has to take into account the fact that little 6 year old Johnny is far, far more likely to get his hands on an 18-rated Manhunt 2 than sneak his way into the local Odeon and watch Hostel."

    This is pure bollox. What's the point of putting age ratings on anything, if they have to take into account little 6 year old johnny that is going to somehow get hold of it anyway? And if Johnny can get hold of 18 rated games, then I'm sure he can get hold of porn and very violent gory films on dvd too, even if he can't sneak into the cinema.

    The BBFC simply can not use that as an argument.

  • miiiguel #14 5 years ago

    bioreit: you should be aware that playgen is right, that's the parents responsability, not the government or any other commercial institution. I've also seen with my own eyes ppl buying GTA for a 6 year old kid, while the clerck insited that the game was not suitable for that age. Meanwhile the parent just said... he knows the difference between virtual and real world. What's your solution to that: take the kid from his father and put him at your door step ?

  • ZuluHero #15 5 years ago

    The moment banning and heavy censorship starts, where will it stop? You know - it could just as easily be an eagerly awaited game like Bioshock next.

  • souljacker2000 #16 5 years ago

    tbh Hostel wasnt that violent.. I think Saw 3 was worse... use that instead Hostel was piss poor

  • remote #17 5 years ago

    "You've seen enough of Manhunt 2 to make a decision on this then, I presume?"

    No, he probably hasn't, and neither have I, for the BBFC have decreed that our brains would melt if we did. That's what all this is about, some 'special' adults making decisions for us 'normal' adults. I would love to come to a fair conclusion about the degree of violence in the game, but I won't get the chance.

  • playgen #18 5 years ago

    "under your logic we should ban all 18rated DVD's since 6 year old johhnny can just as easily get his hands on them"

    But parents are far more likely to let kids buy an 18 rated game than a 18 rated film, this is fact. And because of that BBFC have to respond accordingly.

    People who think nothing should be censored, banned, or even checked are narrow minded, stupid, or just not thinking about it properly.

    If you want teh game youll still be able to get it, so stop moaning about your precious rights, because really they arent affected.

  • Santino #19 5 years ago

    who the hell is little johnny, poor little bastard always gets dragged into arguments.

  • lennon #20 5 years ago

    bioreit - Maybe more closely controlled at the cinemas but how do you know how many under 18's are watching these movies in other ways?

    I was watching 18 movies when I was 12. My parents didnt know I was but there were ways and means of getting the films so id be pretty sure there are more ways and means for kids to watch these films if they want in todays technology led society.

    Banning is not the answer. Just look at the publicity the game has got today. Educating adults who make these purchases is key to all of this as well as enforcing retailers responsibilities.

  • miiiguel #21 5 years ago

    "But parents are far more likely to let kids buy an 18 rated game than a 18 rated film, this is fact. And because of that BBFC have to respond accordingly."



    Then why not ban all +18 games ?


    Then again, "ban" today has little, little effect, even for 12 year old kids. They'll get the game if they want to...
    Edited by 2 at 19/06/07 @ 16:50

  • chupachups #22 5 years ago

    "Bullshit, if it wasnt all over the dailymail this would have passed and we all know it. "

    If it's bullshit, why are bans like this so rare? Their decision to approve Dead Rising was spot on as they even acknowledged it to be quite a humorous game.


    "and then we're just a facist state"

    Try reading about life in some real fascist states before making statements like that. You cheapen the meaning of the phrase by bandying it about so loosely.

    It's perfectly legal to possess Manhunt 2 in the UK, and if you really want it you can mail order it from elsewhere in Europe for about the same price that it costs in Britain. The only thing they've refused it is a certificate to be sold in UK shops.


    "Then why not ban all +18 games ?"

    I think what the BBFC were worried about was the tone of this game, that the only way the player could make progress was by committing terrible and realistic acts of sadistic violence. I don't know, I haven't played the game, but that seems to be what the BBFC say was the crucial difference between something like this and something like Dead Rising.
    Edited by 1 at 19/06/07 @ 16:50

  • #23 5 years ago

    Is Canis Canem Edit violent? I must have got the toned down version or something!

  • miiiguel #24 5 years ago

    It'd be nice to know the place of "Manhunt" word in the top of P2P's network search engine..., as of today.

  • chupachups #25 5 years ago

    "Is Canis Canem Edit violent? I must have got the toned down version or something!"

    Again, it's context, not the violence itself. Violence against children is controversial, violence against aliens or soldiers or obviously-fake sprites is much more acceptable.

  • GordonBennett #26 5 years ago

    "there is no argument you can give to justify banning a violent videogame,"

    Really? Because I've just read some good ones in this thread. People ARE more likely to let their children play adult games than watch adult films.

  • The-Bodybuilder #27 5 years ago

    >"The BBFC has recently supported the release of a number of violent videogames despite the titles attracting controversy, including Rockstar's Canis Canem Edit and Capcom's Dead Rising."

    I hope people actually READ this before proclaiming to us how evil and controlling the BBFC are.

  • lennon #28 5 years ago

    "I think what the BBFC were worried about was the tone of this game, that the only way the player could make progress was by committing terrible and realistic acts of sadistic violence. I don't know, I haven't played the game, but that seems to be what the BBFC say was the crucial difference between something like this and something like Dead Rising."

    I was playing DR last night and I can safely say the only way I could make it into the elevator was by commiting terrible and what I would assume would be pretty realistic acts of violence. My guess the difference here is that the objects of my agression were zombies and I am assuming they are not in Manhunt.

  • playgen #29 5 years ago

    "again a stupid argument, we have to be punsished cos of stupid parents, lets ban chocolate and sugar cos parents are to stupid to stop feeding their kids and now we have lots of fat kids....again there is no argument you can give to justify banning a violent videogame, and that's all it is a violent video game, a crap one at that but the BBFC should just admit keith vaz and co were behind their decision in which case the BBFC should be investigated. "

    It's ONE game thats been banned, thats it!
    One game that now much harder for little kids to get hold of by asking their parents to buy it for them in a highstreet shop. But it will still be easily avaliable to buy for adults from elsewhere.

    Do you really want nothing to be banned?
    Would you really be happy with paedophile material being legal for example?
    Some things need to be censored because viewing them at a young impressionable age would distort that persons view of the world.
    And if the game stays banned thats rockstars fault for not changing it, so if all it is 12 hours of constantly stabbing innocent people, then sorry thats not good enough either from a moral point of view, or as an enjoyable game.
    Edited by 2 at 19/06/07 @ 16:58

  • miiiguel #30 5 years ago

    GordonBennett: so the solution is "no I wont sell you this 'cos you might let your son play it, meanwhile, later on I'll be at your diner table to see if you feed them the vegetables!"

  • spliffhead #31 5 years ago

    http://www.amazon.fr ?

    Stupid really.

  • zuljin #32 5 years ago

    @GordonBennett
    "Really? Because I've just read some good ones in this thread. People ARE more likely to let their children play adult games than watch adult films."

    Letting your child play an 18 game is in the eyes of the law akin to letting them watch pornography.

    Again I can't decide whether I'm for/against, but I don't think "children could play this" is any excuse to ban any film/book/game.

  • miiiguel #33 5 years ago

    "Would you really be happy with pedophile material being legal for example?"

    WOW! really lame comparision! Pedophily is a crime, developing a game isn't, is it? hummm...

  • smoison #34 5 years ago

    I have to admit I trust a parents choice of what thier child can play more then a store clecks / or BBFC.

    Mabye adult parents can chose for themselves....

  • RexRunti #35 5 years ago

    OK a few points for the ignorant out there.

    1. The BBFC are probably the best classification board in the world.
    2. They are an independent body from both government and the industry.
    3. Games are exempt UNLESS they have "gross acts of violence towards humans or animals", "horrific behaviour or incidents", "human sexual activity" and/or "criminal behaviour".
    4. If you sell a BBFC rated game to someone below the age limit you are breaking the law and could receive a large fine and/or a prison sentance.
    5. In a recent interveiw in Edge magazine the BBFC discussed recent research that encouraged them to be MORE LENIENT with games than movies (because you are more likely to put down the controller than stop a video. You also have control over the level of violence your character creates)
    6. The BBFC is not in the habit of banning games (indeed the BBFC did not believe the Hot Coffee mod in GTA would change the rating) in fact i think i read that controversoul game Rule of Rose that was banned in other coutries was rated 15 by the BBFC.
    7. It is illegal in the UK to publish graphical images of minors, incite murder, knowingly write or speak lies about a person or organisation (libale and slander) etc. This is all a form of censorship.
    8. Theme is more important than content according to their guidlines.
    9. (An exerpt from their guidlines regarding films that will not pass clasification)

    "The Board will attempt to deal with films, videos or DVDs which are unacceptable at any category through intervention such as making cuts or requiring the addition of warning captions. If this is not possible or not acceptable to the distributor, works may be refused classification altogether. ‘Taboo’ themes are acceptable, but not if their treatment is likely to encourage harm to viewers or, through their behaviour, to society. The following are of particular concern graphic rape or torture
    sadistic violence or terrorisation illegal and glamorised drug use material likely to incite racial hatred or violence portrayals of children in a sexualised or abusive context sex accompanied by non-consensual pain, injury or humiliation material likely to be found obscene by the courts."

    Manhunt 2 (which no one here has played but the BBFC has) must be very dodgy for the BBFC to take the extraordinary (in fact unique) step of actually refusing classification.

  • Muddtallica #36 5 years ago

    Not posted in months, but I just wanted to chip in and confirm, for the sake of promoted2001, lavalant and others, that Manhunt 2 DOES allow you to, uh, "cut someone's bollox off".

    From IGN's most recent preview: http://wi i.ign.com/articles/792/792012p1...
    "Consider for one moment that in Manhunt 2 you can, Wii remote and nunchuk in hands, use a pair of pliers to clamp onto an enemy's testicles and literally tear them from his body in a bloody display; and if that weren't enough, you'll take one of the poor victim's vertebrae along with his manhood. Or, if you'd prefer, you can use a saw blade and cut upward into a foe's groin and buttocks, motioning forward and backward with the Wii remote as you go."

    For my money, that kind of content is easily as extreme as anything the very worst the mainstream movie biz has to offer; probably moreso, given the interactive, hands-on nature of it.

    As for the rest of this situation, I remain on the fence; on the one hand, the game sounds to me like artistically bankrupt, prurient tosh that glorifies violence in a sleazy, cynical and unhealthy way, but on the other hand banning things and thereby taking away people's right to make moral and qualitative judgement calls for themselves doesn't seem like the way to go either...
    Edited by 1 at 19/06/07 @ 17:06

  • zuljin #37 5 years ago

    @RexRunti
    "7. It is illegal in the UK to publish graphical images of minors, incite murder, knowingly write or speak lies about a person or organisation (libale and slander) etc. This is all a form of censorship."

    Just a side note, if this is the case, does anyone know how Innocence slipped by BBFC? There was full frontal nudity of a minor, which to be honest I think had the whole cinema audience going "thats not quite right"...

  • miiiguel #38 5 years ago

    "1. The BBFC are probably the best classification board in the world."
    Who said? The non-ignorant, I presume.

    "Manhunt 2 (which no one here has played but the BBFC has) must be very dodgy"
    Yes, it must be..., I'm glad you're protected now.

  • groovychainsaw #39 5 years ago

    Actually, hostel is a poor comparison, as it shows that violent acts arent 'nice'. Wheras manhunt has no obvious moral compass, suggesting that sadism can save your character....
    Edit: But I do agree, most of the problem is with the rules in retail and education of parents, there should always be an age-rated category that prevents minors playing such games, but still makes it available to the general public. On the whole though, the BBFC are very reasonable compared to other censors, and I support their decision on this - They must have good cause.
    Edited by 1 at 19/06/07 @ 17:10

  • playgen #40 5 years ago

    ""Would you really be happy with pedophile material being legal for example?"

    WOW! really lame comparision! Pedophily is a crime, developing a game isn't, is it? hummm..."

    The point is when people say no games should be banned, then you open the gates for anything to be in games - would you want a game where you play as a paedophile? no of course you wouldnt.

    There HAS to be a line drawn somewhere, and a game with constant murder with no other gameplay elements is just that.

    Just because its a game doesn't mean it should be exempt from being censored or banned if the developer refuses to change it.

  • lennon #41 5 years ago

    Incidently do they "actually" play the games. I thought they were given a summary?

    How many people are involved in the final decision and are they representative of the general public?

    Just interested.

  • MrBiggles #42 5 years ago

    Wii freeloader is coming this year, Datel confirmed it in a Email to me, just get that and import the fucking game and stop whining like bitches, they've only ever banned one other game, you're basically saying they're not allowed to do there job without you man babies crying about everything they do.

    fuck off and grow up.
    Edited by 2 at 19/06/07 @ 17:11

  • bushwod #43 5 years ago

    @bioreit

    I actually made basically the same point as you in a earlier thread, and agree the problem is the lack of parents and retailers stopping kids buying 18 games and that needs to change.

    However I think it's very wrong if the BBFC is banning what could have been an 18 game becuse kids might play it, because that surly goes for all 18 games. I also don't personally buy their comment that it isn't political.

    I'm not saying I have a solution (although maybe they could release it with large warnings on the cover), but I worry setting a precident for censorship in the games industry again could lead to a downward spiral.

    I also never claimed to be an expert on this game, or mentioned Hostel 2.

    So don't tell me to "Shut up" and " get a clue" you prick!

  • Muddtallica #44 5 years ago

    Also: I've seen the "paedophile game" question crop up a few times in this debate, but the people who it's directed at always seem to misinterpret or avoid it, so I'd be interested to hear a straight answer: hand on heart, how would you feel about a paedophile simulation game? A game in which you could stalk, groom, abduct and abuse children? Developing and playing such a title would harm no-one, and technically be totally legal too...

  • lennon #45 5 years ago

    @MrBiggles I think you misunderstand a number of peoples concerns for wanting to play manhunt 2 when its more the precdent that could be set by this decision.
    Edited by 1 at 19/06/07 @ 17:14

  • t8yman #46 5 years ago

    I cant believe the amount of crap people are spouting in this thread.

    Hostel 2 is a film where you are meant to feel uncomfortable and uneasy and wince at the pain, its shit, but obviously enough people pay to see this kind of shit.

    MH2 from what we understand, is a game where you are rewarded and only allowed to progress by killing people in gruesome ways.

    2 completely different concepts. both are shit, and both should be banned IMHO, but the game ban suits me fine. GTA should also be banned.

  • miiiguel #47 5 years ago

    yes MrBibbles, I'll do that, in fact this is not even my problem, I don't live in UK I just buy games there because they're cheaper...

    I't just that Censorship makes me shiver and shake, but that's for other reasons....
    Edited by 1 at 19/06/07 @ 17:16

  • Ed6445 #48 5 years ago

    I really have a big problem with the government, or any organisation, being able to tell us what we can and can't do, play or watch. Surely most people over the age of 18 are able to make their own minds up with what they can handle or not- perhaps better guidance on what the game contains might be useful- but to outright ban a game is a joke. And to be honest, whatever the game shows, its unlikely to be much worse than some of the stuff you see on tv- for example the emaciated, rotting corpses which are shown on crime programs, or even the news.
    People should be able to make their own decisions.

  • miiiguel #49 5 years ago

    "2 completely different concepts. both are shit, and both should be banned IMHO, but the game ban suits me fine. GTA should also be banned."

    Banned from where, your island, or the world ?, You can't stop ppl from doing what they want nowdays..., ok, ok maybe you can if you're a member of the Chinese Communist Party...

    edit: In Prey you kill little virtual kids, I bought the game in Amazon UK.
    Edited by 1 at 19/06/07 @ 17:23

  • MrBiggles #50 5 years ago

    Here is one of the reasons this game was banned

    A pen can be jabbed in a guard's eye to take them down, spilling blood on the camera in the process...After stalking his victim Danny grabs them from behind and rams the pen into the face of the guard, before kicking them to the ground and repeatedly shoving the weapon in his face until it's a bloody pulp. It's a scene that will make even the most ardent gore lover wince

    now please shut up, the game was banned for a bloody good reason.

  • kangarootoo #51 5 years ago

    @Ed6445

    "I really have a big problem with the government, or any organisation, being able to tell us what we can and can't do"

    What about the cops (and organisation) telling me I can't murder your family. Would you have a problem with that? I don't mean to cause offense, I'm just harshly exploiting a glaring hole in your comment.

    As I said in a previous thread, if you want total freedom, go live in on desert island. If you choose to live in society, you choose to be governed by rules. The choice is yours, so you can't really complain about it.

    "People should be able to make their own decisions"

    Yes they absolutely should, but history has shown they bloody well can't, so we entrust wiser people to make descisions for them. We always winge about a nanny state, but we have consistently shown that even the slightest effort on our part is too much like hard work.

    The general populace are reactive and uninformed. I for one don't want them making descisions that affect my life. Much rather a body that knows what it is doing and at least gives a shit. Apathy is one of the key flaws in any democracy.
    Edited by 1 at 19/06/07 @ 17:25

  • Pac-man-ate-my-wife #52 5 years ago

    What I love most about all these posts is not one fucker on this forum has played Manhunt 2.

  • Rirekon #53 5 years ago

    Ok;

    1. Games are not the same as Films/Books/etc.., it's a different media so please get over it.

    2. It was going to be shit anyway, hardly anyone bought Manhunt until it got all hyped by the media, so really you aren't missing anything ;-)

  • t8yman #54 5 years ago

    read Mr Biggles post above and tell me why we need to play it pac man?

  • playgen #55 5 years ago

    I can't believe how stupid some people are, it's quite sad to read.

    If you can't see reason for some things to be censored your an idiot.

    And it's Rockstar that got their own game banned, so blame them.
    Edited by 1 at 19/06/07 @ 17:27

  • kangarootoo #56 5 years ago

    @Pac-man ate my wife

    That isn't really the point of any of the discussions though is it?
    Edited by 1 at 19/06/07 @ 17:25

  • miiiguel #57 5 years ago

    bigo: you can smoke a joint the moment you step your feet in Netherlands, or Barcelona, so we're not talking about a "oh so vile behaviour!".

  • bushwod #58 5 years ago

    @MrBiggles

    "Here is one of the reasons this game was banned

    A pen can be jabbed in a guard's eye to take them down, spilling blood on the camera in the process...After stalking his victim Danny grabs them from behind and rams the pen into the face of the guard, before kicking them to the ground and repeatedly shoving the weapon in his face until it's a bloody pulp. It's a scene that will make even the most ardent gore lover wince

    now please shut up, the game was banned for a bloody good reason."


    Sounds no worse than the punisher game to me, even if it is graphically more gory.

    Exactly how is this different to ripping out peoples spines in mortal kombat?

    Are they suggesting because this is set in the 'real world', some over 18 isn't going to be able to tell the difference between this game and reality, I mean I know some people are dense but come on!
    Edited by 1 at 19/06/07 @ 17:28

  • t8yman #59 5 years ago

    the yanks will get it, unless theres a stray nipple in there, and then it will be banned

  • kangarootoo #60 5 years ago

    @bigo

    Because depicting law breaking acts in a game is not a banning offense perhaps?

  • kangarootoo #61 5 years ago

    @bushwod

    The argument is not, and has never been, that people "cannot tell the difference". I call strawman on you.

  • miiiguel #62 5 years ago

    playgen: geeezuz..., why judge ppl's IQ just because they have different opinions than yours?

    "oh, oh, the sorrow, I'm surrounded by retards because they they think they can make they're own decisions!"

    Rockstar isn't really suffering from all their "bad decisions", are they?
    Edited by 1 at 19/06/07 @ 17:31

  • Muddtallica #63 5 years ago

    lavalant: As far as I'm concerned, this debate isn't about violence or sex specifically; it's about censorship, and the question of whether or not some content is so extreme that we simply shouldn't be allowed to get our hands on it. Violence and sex are being cited as examples because they're the two things that are most likely to get you censored. Manhunt 2 contains pretty much the most extreme levels of violence imaginable, and plenty of people seem to be coming out in support of it, so that's why I'm interested to know if those same people would also be happy to accept the most extreme levels of sexuality, because if not, that's a bit of a double standard that says to me that these people are commenting more on what does or does not offend them personally, rather than taking an overarching moral stance on censorship...

  • mossychops001 #64 5 years ago

    I am going down to Soho to speak to someone from the BBFC now, got my plastic bag at the ready.
    Edited by 1 at 19/06/07 @ 17:32

  • playgen #65 5 years ago

    "playgen: geeezuz..., why judge ppl's IQ just because they have different opinions than yours?

    "oh, oh, the sorrow, I'm surrounded by retards because they they think they can make they're own decisions!" "

    Well when people say that no games should be censored no matter whats in them, then yes they are stupid, or haven't thought about it properly - kind of the same thing.

  • peeetah #66 5 years ago

    Who do these people think they are saying what we can and cant view/play? Its ridiculous.

  • smelly #67 5 years ago

    FUCKING NANNY STATE.. FUCK YOU BBFC.

    (even though the game is apparently shite)

  • miiiguel #68 5 years ago

    The odd thing is that some ppl agree with this "protection", then again I might be stupid..., but I do make my own choices.

  • Fudce #69 5 years ago

    @Lennon

    "Incidently do they "actually" play the games. I thought they were given a summary?"

    -They do play the games, in their original statement, they mentioned how they used codes provided by Rockstar to play various levels of the game.

    "How many people are involved in the final decision and are they representative of the general public?"

    -They use a panel of people for each submission, and they are taken from a representitive selection of backgrounds.

  • smelly #70 5 years ago

    And of course the BBFC treats games differently to films. You woulnt believe what has to get cut out of most games when the cartoon network gets away with much much worse.

    I dont care much for violent games myself - i dont see the point in them.

    BUT This is the start of the beginning. If games companies are too scared that their game wont even be allowed to be sold in a country - then they'll start to cut them back.. And the bbfc will get tougher and tougher.. Then we'll all be left with barbie fucking riding school.

  • BettySwallocks #71 5 years ago

    "1. The BBFC are probably the best classification board in the world."
    Who said? The non-ignorant, I presume.
    If you had read any of the other posts in this thread or even on other boards regarding this you would realise that the BBFC is not the most repressive classification board in the world. That honor may fall to Germany which has not one but two classification agencies, the FSK and SPIO. Even in America its not all sunny... Want to buy a violent game, a gun - no problem! want to depict sex? swear openly on tv? Sorry... Not so keen on that. Conversly I remember seeing a full frontal nude female in an advert for shower gel in a supermarket in Berlin 15 years ago (oh those were the days....).

    Each society deems what is and is not acceptable. While I do agree that we have to be careful what is censored in our name I don't necessarily see this as the sky falling in. This is the first time that a game has been rejected classification in 10 years (revoked on appeal I might add) and those that really want it will be able to get it on import.

    If nothing else this might be seen as R* and T2 using controversly to sell games again.

  • smelly #72 5 years ago

    @Fudce : No they dont. They rely on video'd playthroughs of the game.

    Ocassionally they'll have cheats to take them to certain levels to look at them in detail.

    The problem is that you have to video pretty much every possibility "just in case". Which is why things like VC games on the wii can take so long to appear (it's a long fucking process)

  • smelly #73 5 years ago

    That said.. there's nowt stopping T2 from releasign the game anyhows (just up to stores to decide whether to stock it)

  • alpha-0ne #74 5 years ago

    "I dont like manhunt but it proves the BBFC dont class games in the same boat as movies, books, theatre or music and if it can't then it's not fit for it;s purpose and future games like GTA, Doom, even RPG's with sexual content are in great danger of becoming banned or heavily censored, and then we're just a facist state "

    Not true at all the context and constant themes in manhunt are sadistic and brutal killing in the most horrible way you can think of, it glorified aswell as much as possible

    In game slike doom you are killing monster, GTA you do lots od other tings in fact you are not encouraged to cut someone throat or decapitiate them

    Im sure anyone can see this manhunt is nothing like the games you listed

    You mention sexual content well if GTA allowed you rape someone or something like that that would be the equivalent of whar is going on in manhunt

  • smoison #75 5 years ago

    Games = ART

    Art should not be censored.

    Age restrcitions is one thing.

  • Muddtallica #76 5 years ago

    OK, so we've established that there's a lot of fervently anti-censorship people here, so how come no-one will answer the question about the hypothetical paedophile videogame? Like I said, I'm right on the fence here, so I'm not trying to make judgement calls, but I am interested to test the vercaity of some people's arguments. Is it that people believe that there IS a line to be drawn somewhere, but that Manhunt 2 hasn't crossed it (which suggests that you do agree with censorship in theory)? Or is it that art is art is art, and should be free to explore absolutely any area it wishes, even graphic child abuse?

  • secombe #77 5 years ago

    That said.. there's nowt stopping T2 from releasign the game anyhows (just up to stores to decide whether to stock it)

    From what I understand once it's been rejected by the BBFC it becomes illegal for retailers in the UK to sell it. Games are only exempt if they do not feature strong violence/sex etc, once that becomes an issue they come under pretty much the same rules as movies.

  • BettySwallocks #78 5 years ago

    smoison
    Back to what Muddtallica said, if I had naked pictures of children on my PC's HD and said that they are art does that expempt me from being accused of paedophilia?

    Not all games are art.

  • simiankid #79 5 years ago

    Smelly: That said.. there's nowt stopping T2 from releasign the game anyhows (just up to stores to decide whether to stock it)

    Well, nothing apart from the law. If you (as a game publisher) depict 'gross' (ie non-cartoon) violence then your game loses its exemption and must be submitted to the BBFC.

    Should Take 2 decide to publish the game 'anyhows' they'll be liable for a fairly huge fine and probably some fun court action also.

    Oh and just to stir everything up, can anyone think of a single civilisation in which censorship does not take place in any form? Betcha can't.

  • BettySwallocks #80 5 years ago

    interestingly the wikipedia entry for the BBFC already changes to reflect this news.
    Edited by 1 at 19/06/07 @ 18:10

  • miiiguel #81 5 years ago

    Muddtallica: paedophilie is not part of human nature, violence is. Art shouldn't be controlled, imo. You like it buy it, you don't like it don't buy it, don't try to "protect" other people, that's abusive.

    simiankid: how can you forbid ppl from getting the game?, "a cop per game system ?", Amazon US is accepting pre-orders.

  • secombe #82 5 years ago

    You haven't answered the paedophilia question...

    peadophillia is illegal in all forms, violent video games aren't, flawed comparison.

    You're comparing real paedophilia to 'fake' violence. The original point was regarding a paedophilia GAME. So 'fake' paedophilia vs. 'fake' violence. Obviously paedophilia is illegal, but then so is murder.

  • bushwod #83 5 years ago

    I think many here have made the valid point that games and films are not the same, although it is probably the closest medium for comparison.

    In which case I raise the question, what about American Psycho?

    Admittedly the tone of the two pieces are very different, with Psycho being an excellent black comedy where as Manhunt 2 is (no doubt) a rather naff thriller/horror with a high level of gore. However both feature a protagonist who kills for no good reason.

    Does the fact that you control the characters actions in the game make it unacceptable? If the game does not give you a choice (I keep hearing you have to kill to progress and that there is no alternative option) then surly you are just leading the character through the story of the game and his moral choice is not yours if it is the only course available.

    At least in games like GTA or the upcoming Bioshock the choices of killing hockers or the Lil' Sisters is the player own moral choice, I find that more disturbing than things like this.

  • miiiguel #84 5 years ago

    BettySwallocks: Larry Clark's movie "Kids" shows underage kids doing all sorts of funky stuff... call the cops!

    He has also a book of kids in "funky" poses, wich is indeed considered art.
    Edited by 1 at 19/06/07 @ 18:20

  • Muddtallica #85 5 years ago

    lavalant: Maybe you didn't understand my question, because that doesn't answer it; I'm not asking if you think a paedophilia game WOULD be banned or not, I'm asking if you think it SHOULD be. Yes, child abuse is illegal, but so is murder, and you've already said that you think that games based on that subject, produced and enjoyed harmlessly by free-thinking adults, should be allowed to propogate free from censorship. Do you think should paedophilia-based games be afforded the same amnesty? And if not, why not?

    miiguel: "paedophilie is not part of human nature, violence is."

    Violence may be part of human nature, so is sexuality, but there's no way that pulling off someone's balls with a pair of pliers is any more an acceptably "natural" progression" of normal human aggression than paedophilia and rape are natural progressions of normal human libido. That strikes me as a massive double standard...and you didn't provide a clear answer to the question, either.
    Edited by 1 at 19/06/07 @ 18:35

  • miiiguel #86 5 years ago

    If this kind of games are such a "bad call" and "stupid move not to change it" I wonder why thy keep spawning...? People don't want them..., no one buys them..., right ?

    oh wait... GTA is the best selling game ever...! oh man those 15 million people are all so stupid!
    Edited by 1 at 19/06/07 @ 18:35

  • bioreit #87 5 years ago

    @ bushwod

    I'll call you what I damn like - unless you want to DA DA DUN! censor me?

    But I thought you were against censorship? Oh, but wait, it's only when people censor something YOU want to do, isn't it?

    And my 'get a clue' comment was made in reference to the fact that I don't think you had fully read the BBFC's position in the original article, nor fully realise the reasons behind it. (None of this will be directed at lavalant - I think he's frothing more than a latte at the moment and I don't want to whisk him further into a foaming frenzy).

    The BBFC has been amazingly level-headed of late - in their recent ruling over Dead Rising, they commented that mature adults shoudl be allowed to decide how to entertain themselves, hence the '18' ruling.

    However (THIS IS THE IMPORTANT BIT), the BBFC have also stated that Manhunt 2 represents too much of a risk to allow it into the public domain. The reason for the difference between Manhunt 2 and Dead Rising?

    The BBFC obviously believe that the checks and balances in place within this country that prevent minors from purchasing/playing DR were sufficient to stop it from becoming played in significant numbers, but the content of the game was such that if minors DID get hold of it, things would probably be ok.

    They do not feel this way about Manhunt 2. Their position is such that the probability that someone over 18 could buy it with the sole intention of playing it themselves, but then go out and their much younger brother (or whoever you want to populate this hypothetical situation) plays it without their knowledge nor consent, is something that is not acceptable.

    Oh and the comments about 'you can't stop a parent buying a game for their kid'? Yes you can. Same as alcohol, cigarettes, DVDs and porn - if the seller has reason to believe that the customer is purchasing the product with the intention of supplying it to a minor, then the seller has the legal obligation to refuse service.

  • bioreit #88 5 years ago

    @ smelly

    "BUT This is the start of the beginning. If games companies are too scared that their game wont even be allowed to be sold in a country - then they'll start to cut them back.. And the bbfc will get tougher and tougher.. Then we'll all be left with barbie fucking riding school."

    Really? Bloody hellfire then! That is a horrible concept and you all have my full support.








    Oh, no you don't - because it didn't bloody happen once they banned Carmageddon in 1997, did it? The 'Theoretical Floodgates holding back the Torrent of Unrestrained Censorship" remained well and truly closed.

  • miiiguel #89 5 years ago

    bioreit: maybe not because "they" are so well balanced but because every single kid played the damn game, even in that decade when there wasn't no P2P's.
    If you think kids wont get their hands on this game your wrong, but I guess you'll sleep better.
    Edited by 3 at 19/06/07 @ 18:42

  • bioreit #90 5 years ago

    @ lavalant

    I know I promised myself I'd avoid referring to you, but what the hey:

    Where is all this media pressure and uproar about Manhunt 2 that you constantly and continuously refer to then? It must have slipped past my radar. There very well could have been comments and things, but nothing like the media circus surrounding the first Manhunt, nor Rule of Rose (which got classified by the BBFC, by the way), nor Carmageddon. Nor even about the Hot Coffee mod nor even the nekkid NPC mod for Oblivion.

    So please - if you're going to refer to it and use it as an example in your argument, furnish me with evidence, starting.................................................... ......now.

    Edit 1: Damn you subconscious Rhymer Ganglion!
    Edited by 1 at 19/06/07 @ 18:47

  • bioreit #91 5 years ago

    Ok, miiiguel, I really can't understand what you're trying to say. I know I'm watching Sharpe and eating salad at the same time, but I don't think feta cheese affects my cognitive skills that much......

  • miiiguel #92 5 years ago

    I'm saying that you are right, and I wish you'd marry my daughter.

  • bioreit #93 5 years ago

    Cool. Will you accept puppies as a dowry? They're all I have.

    That and my righteous indignation and a predilection for toasted muffins.

  • bioreit #94 5 years ago

    Enlighten me then, lavalant.

  • EmiliasHorse #95 5 years ago

    I'm with bioreit on the whole toasted muffin issue.

  • miiiguel #96 5 years ago

    all in all this made me pre-order the damn game..., shit!

  • bioreit #97 5 years ago

    I have extra - you like Philadelphia and smoked salmon?

    /passes Emilia'sHorse toasted muffin

  • EmiliasHorse #98 5 years ago

    Thank you very much, love salmon.

  • bioreit #99 5 years ago

    Huzzah!

    Not to be confused with 'Hussar', which was a type of cavalryman.

    Watching too much Sharpe at the moment, says me.

  • Penguinzoot #100 5 years ago

    Hmmm ... the last 8-9 posts are the best part of this thread methinks ;-)

    @Kangarootoo - as always, you try so hard to bring perspective and decent, reasoned debate to the comments threads, but TBH I think it's a losing cause. Respect++ for trying though. Not sure I would have the patience.

  • bioreit #101 5 years ago

    I'm very easily distra....Ooh, goldfish!

  • miiiguel #102 5 years ago

    [link url=http://www.amazon.com/Rockstar-Ga mes-Manhunt-2/dp/B000NIJ35W/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/104-9246551-8812 710?ie=UTF8&s=videogames&qid=1182276803&sr=8-1
    ]http://ww w.amazon.com/Rockstar-Games-Man...[/link]

    Gift-wrap available.

  • smelly #103 5 years ago

    "Games = ART

    Art should not be censored. "


    Games arent art.. Games are toys.

  • bioreit #104 5 years ago

    Smelly also wins a toasted muffin for that last comment.

    If he wants one?

  • miiiguel #105 5 years ago

    Toys can be art.

    edit: not sure about games, but I am about toys.
    Edited by 2 at 19/06/07 @ 19:22

  • Lov3 #106 5 years ago

    Oh fuck off, thats exactly why you banned it.

    "We have to make a decision. If we feel it's not appropriate for classification then we have to make that decision - we can't classify it and hope nobody notices it."

    This is why our country is so fucked up. Some crazy idiots with peerages are apparently allowed to tell me what games I can buy. Whats the point of this? Who does it benefit, exactly?

  • paul_haine #107 5 years ago

    In answer to zuljin back on the first page of comments:

    "does anyone know how Innocence slipped by BBFC? There was full frontal nudity of a minor"

    Nudity doesn't equal pornography, that's why - the key is in the word 'graphic', i.e., sexual or 'lascivious' situations or poses. In the case of Innocence, it's just this two- or three-second shot of a girl getting out of a bath, probably wouldn't even be commented on in France.

  • miiiguel #108 5 years ago

    yellowtruck:
    R* => GTA
    Grand Theft Auto is arguably one of the most, if not the most successful game... ever.


    Ok, it's average, but...:

    GOLDEN JOYSTICK AWARDS
    PlayStation 2 Game of the Year - Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas
    BBC Radio One - Colin and Edith's Best Game Soundtrack of 2005 - Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas
    Hero of 2005 - CJ from Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas
    Villain of 2005 - Officer Tenpenny from Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas
    Nuts Magazine's Ultimate Game of 2005 - Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas


    and...:
    http://ww w.eurogamer.net/article.php?art...
    Edited by 2 at 19/06/07 @ 20:10

  • smelly #109 5 years ago

    "Nudity doesn't equal pornography, that's why - the key is in the word 'graphic', i.e., sexual or 'lascivious' situations or poses. In the case of Innocence, it's just this two- or three-second shot of a girl getting out of a bath, probably wouldn't even be commented on in France."


    Okay.. explain why the bbfc passed both "romance" and "9 songs" uncut. Both feature full intercourse/blow job/come shot scenes - and both only got an 18.

    Or indeed hostel 2 (which is just as violent as this game)

  • Royal Fool #110 5 years ago

    The BBFC are only doing what they think is best.

    Most games don't fall under their influence at all, only the ones depicting violence in some form. And from that group, only a couple has ever been banned.

    Just be happy the UK isn't turning into Germany.

  • Pablo2k5 #111 5 years ago

    Lov3 said... "This is why our country is so fucked up. Some crazy idiots with peerages are apparently allowed to tell me what games I can buy. Whats the point of this? Who does it benefit, exactly?"

    It benefits everyone, you included. From what I've read and seen of this game so far in my opinion it is sick. Who knows what effect acting out this kind of violence could have on a damaged or young mind.

    You think this sounds like fun???

    From IGN's most recent preview: http://wi i.ign.com/articles/792/792012p1...
    "Consider for one moment that in Manhunt 2 you can, Wii remote and nunchuk in hands, use a pair of pliers to clamp onto an enemy's testicles and literally tear them from his body in a bloody display; and if that weren't enough, you'll take one of the poor victim's vertebrae along with his manhood. Or, if you'd prefer, you can use a saw blade and cut upward into a foe's groin and buttocks, motioning forward and backward with the Wii remote as you go."

    I do NOT condone censorship on the whole BUT there is no place in a civilised society for this rubbish. It's probably a crap game too.
    And, any sick fucks that still want to buy it can, via import.

  • Lov3 #112 5 years ago

    @Muddtalica: OK, so we've established that there's a lot of fervently anti-censorship people here, so how come no-one will answer the question about the hypothetical paedophile videogame?

    The reason no-one really wants to take this point is because paedophilia is such an extreme taboo in todays society. No-one even wants to be associated with it, and as such there is no-one who will stand up and publicly defend of the rights of paedophiles. Why do you think that computer generated images of child pornography are illegal over here? They hurt no-one, and arguably allow people with these urges to find a release that does not involve harming children. But associating yourself with that kind of case is PR suicide, so no-one makes the challenge, and the law stands.

    Equally likely, paedophilia is invoked time and time again on the internet. It's the new 'but think of the children!' Perhaps there should be a variant of Godwins law that deals with it...

    ... nevertheless, since it seems like a legitimate point, i'll take it. Certainly a kiddy-fiddling game would be disgusting in the extreme to the average person, and I could never agree to be associated with it in any way. But it is not actively harmful to anyone, it is nothing more than fantasy. You cannot draw some kind of arbitrary line at which point you aren't allowed to express thoughts that aren't harmful to others, because thats thought police territory, and we all know what happens when you start condoning that. So yes, it should be legal, and really our law should have no loopholes which allow this kind of thing to become censored.


    EDIT: @Pablo2k5: It benefits everyone, you included. From what I've read and seen of this game so far in my opinion it is sick. Who knows what effect acting out this kind of violence could have on a damaged or young mind.

    Ahh, the bread and butter of the pro-censorship crowd - "I know whats best for you," "I don't like it, make it illegal," and who could forget "won't somebody please think of the children!" Certainly the game sounds violent. I've played a lot of violent games however, and seen a lot of violent films, and i'm pretty sure I wouldn't be particularly shocked. You sound like you would be - to you, I suggest not buying the game. But don't tell me what I can and can't do with my free time, and don't tell me how I can and can't raise my kids. That is not your decision to make.

    In addition, I can imagine that quote sounds quite horrible to some people. The lovely thing about text is that it gives no actual idea what the game is like - it might not be all that gory at all. Your mind will automatically fill in the blanks, and I can guarantee that no game is going to come close to that standard in the near future. It's a PS2 and Wii game, it's not going to bare any resemblance to real life at all! That is exactly how GTA3 managed to generate a controversy, people read exaggerated descriptions in The Daily Hate and imagined the rest, when in actuality it was barely more than a violent cartoon.
    Edited by 2 at 19/06/07 @ 21:29

  • dominalien #113 5 years ago

    uk = germany? some of my countrymen would have an instant heart attack at this. if they were still alive, that is.

  • smelly #114 5 years ago

    @Pablo2k5: There's a scene in hostel 2 where someone gets their testicles removed in a similar way.

    Does that need to be banned too?

    Bear in mind:

    1) hostel features REAL people with very realistic effects
    2) Manhunt2's graphics would require a MAJOR imagination to believe them to be "real"

  • Zaccix #115 5 years ago

    You have to ban a game across the world to really make it hard to get hold of. The BBFC's ban just means people will turn to imports and torrents (not that I'm advocating piracy, but it's true).

    So, which game's next for the BBFC's banhammer? Which game should we all be protected from next?

  • Pablo2k5 #116 5 years ago

    Smelly said... "There's a scene in hostel 2 where someone gets their testicles removed in a similar way. Does that need to be banned too?"

    I haven't seen Hostel 2 but watching a sadistic murderer in a movie and acting out the role are different in my opinion.

    This game is so obviously trying to gain more sales off the back of its notoriety, it's pathetic.

    I'm no prude but I still believe there should be some boundaries. This 'game' crossed the line as far as the BBFC is concerned.

    In light of how rare the occasion that a violent game is banned is, I am happy at this decision and do not feel as if any meaningful liberty has taken...

  • Pablo2k5 #117 5 years ago

    Zaccix said.... "So, which game's next for the BBFC's banhammer? Which game should we all be protected from next?"

    Any that has... and I quote from the BBFC...

    "sustained and cumulative casual sadism in the way in which these killings are committed, and encouraged, in the game."

    and

    "unrelenting focus on stalking and brutal slaying"

    and

    "unremitting bleakness and callousness of tone"

    You want people like this playing Manhunt 2?
    http://ne ws.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/londo...
    Edited by 4 at 19/06/07 @ 22:19

  • spitfire1945 #118 5 years ago

    Hi, does anyone know that there are parental lock on the next gen consoles??? It does work on PEGI ratings and if we let everyone know about it, maybe we will become the one choosing what to play and not BBFC or whoever!!!

    Please spread the word!! It's very important that this feature become known to everyone.

    It's unfair, especially for the Wii, not to have this kind of game son the shelves.

    Let's do something!

  • peetfeet #119 5 years ago

    The first game was awful, played for half an hour and got bored shitless. I wouldn't be buying the game anyway, but having said that i don't agree with the ban.

    If people want to play it let them, it's their waste of money. I'm fed up with all this video games/heavy metal/movies are to blame for so and so killings (delete as appropriate), total and utter bollocks.

    Psycopaths are to blame with killings. No one or anything else is responsable.

  • Ryze #120 5 years ago

    Yes, I reckon I will buy the game from Europe.

    DVD players also have parental controls. Does anyone actually use them (apart from geek dads)?

    We're in the realm of instruction manuals and programming VCRs here.

  • Monkey-Wizard-Ken #121 5 years ago

    Shit, I'm gonna have to chop people for real now :|

  • JHuxley #122 5 years ago

    Smelly is right, there are plenty of films that are arguably more graphic and sadistic in their depiction of violence than Manhunt. But in films such as Hostel the ones committing the violent acts are plainly depicted as the 'bad guys', and the film actually concerns itself more with the people trying to escape from them. It makes a BIG difference to the tone of the movie.

    However, if Hostel were more like the first two Guinea Pig films which is just a long, excruciatingly sadistic torture scene with little plot and no real characters to speak of I'd imagine the BBFC would likely ban that too (as far as I know it's never been given a certificate in the UK, though you can pick it up on import from the US...not that I...uhh...).

    Anyway, I'd say Manhunt is more comparable to Guinea Pig than Hostel. And although I'd prefer to see no censorship at all, I can understand why they've come to this decision. Guinea Pig isn't easy viewing.

  • miiiguel #123 5 years ago

    anyways... this allready made history. A banned in UK, and AO only in US game, debuting on a... Wii, near you!

    Pablo2k5 : I got to agree with you on this one, this is a perfect normal kid, and he would never ever be a problem to our society if it wasn't for that, sick, sick, disgusting, oh so violent, tv series, CSI.
    Edited by 2 at 20/06/07 @ 01:52

  • miiiguel #124 5 years ago

    I wish the wisdom keepers, protect us all from evil CSI.

  • Grogmonkey #125 5 years ago

    Laws and regulations aren't in place to protect individuals. There isn't a law against murder because we're all worried someone's going to kill YOU. No one cares if you get murdered (in a global sense). No, there are laws against murder because if it was legal everyone would be killing everyone else for the most insignificant of reasons. And that's not a great way of keeping a society together. In order for society to function in even a half-decent way, there need to be laws governing what is and is not appropriate; behaviourally (what we can and can not do) and something else (which would mean what is and is not considered decent for polite society, if I didn't have a brain meltdown just then).

    So we have laws that dictate what polite society thinks we should be allowed to do, and we have regulations (such as this BBFC decision) that dictate the boundaries of decency for the things that ARE legal. For instance, it's not illegal to swear like a trooper on TV. But society dictates that, for decency's sake, there should be times when it is not appropriate to do so. Like during scheduled CBBC time. It just makes sense. Words aren't banned because, hell, they're just words. But that doesn't mean we can't impose guidelines on the use of those words on a public forum, like television.

    In a similar manner, the BBFC is stating that, as far as they're concerned, Manhunt 2 does not have a place in polite society. Presumably (I haven't played it, so I can't speak from experience), the game features horrendous acts of deplorable violence and cruelty. And (also presumably) it presents these acts in a manner which has neither a greater sense of purpose (the narrative reasoning for these acts is obtuse or non-existant) or justifiable in their own context (is there really a need to 'castrate a man with a pair of pliers', or is it just violence for the sake of violence?). If that's the case, and going by the statements by the BBFC, it seems to be, then certainly that's reason enough to remove the game from polite society. There have been judgements on what society deems socially responsible media, and apparantly this game falls beyond those lines.

    Remember, the BBFC isn't rating games specifically for gamers. They're not rating things based on what they believe gamers can handle ("Oh no, Manhunt is far too violent for you, Mr Generic Gamer. We shall ban it from sale.";). They're rating it for society as a whole ("We believe this kind of senseless violence serves no purpose in this society.";). This has little to do with who's going to play it (although I'm sure that entered into the decision, as well it should), and more to do with what we as a society allow into our culture.

    Finally, a comment on this 'society' thing I keep banging on about. It's obviously the thing we live in, and its values are dictated by the people living in it. In recent years, there values have been changing. As people are more accepting of sex and violence, it's becoming more prevalent (although it seems to be reaching a plateau these days, if shower gel adverts are anything to go by. They're pretty much my litmus test for changing social accpetance. The more of the breast you can see, the more accepting of sex we are. It's reasonably accurate.). In saying that, I would bet that, were you to take a survey of everyone in this country as to whether Manhunt 2 should or should not be banned (Making sure they have played it first, of course, thereby discovering where the boundaries on decency truely are in this country), the consensus would be on the side of banning it. I say this with relative confidence because the BBFC has rated some games and films that are pretty excessively violent, and that certain sections of the population have called to be banned. If the BBFC (which, to emphasise, has rated extremely violent films and games that people have wanted banned before) suggests it's not appropriate material, I would wager the weight of opinion would be on their side.

    It's late, and I'm tired, so I may have started repeating myself. For the sake of clarity, I shall try and summarise at the end (because I'm guessing most people will skip to this bit, anyway): the BBFC makes a decision on what is appropriate for society AS A WHOLE. They have viewed the evidence and stated that Manhunt 2 is a game that society deems inappropriate. What right do they have to make that decision? Well, they're a group that's been around for almost 100 years, so I'd say they have the 'media rating' experience. They gather people from all walks of life to review the films and games, so I'd guess they have a nice cross-section of society in order to guage where the lines of decency should be drawn.

    And hell, Take Two can always appeal the decision and get it overturned, anyway.

    Anyhoo, I wasn't going to buy it anyway. Good thing I don't herald this as the beginning of a wave of game banning, like some kind of crazy conspiracy theorist. Otherwise I might be worried.

  • smelly #126 5 years ago

    @yellowtruck: Whether or not it sucked as a film is by the by as to why they allowed the sequel through (which even has testicle removal in) and not this game.

    That film looks realistic, this game doesnt - so i fail to see how one can warp my fragile little mind and the other cant.

  • smelly #127 5 years ago

    "This game is so obviously trying to gain more sales off the back of its notoriety, it's pathetic. "


    Why's it pathetic for a game to do that, but not film?

    I can name 100's of poplur (although admitidly shite) films which were popular on the back of their notoriety. Why is it not pathetic for them?

  • bioreit #128 5 years ago

    @ smelly

    As someone pointed out above (as, indeed, did the BBFC in their ruling):

    Manhunt 2 features extreme, sadistic, continued violence throughout. Yes, this may have similarities to Hostel and Hostel 2 in a thematic sense; however, those films and Manhunt 2 differ in two crucial ways:

    1. Hostel and Hostel 2 feature several substantial elements which have nothing to do with graphic, horrible violence - the 'setting-of-the-scene' stuff, for example), whereas Manhunt 2 has no respite whatsoever from violence. It is unrelenting and constant. The BBFC said they tried to look for periods of respite, but found none.

    2. In both Hostel and Hostel 2, the audience are aware that the brutal sadist is a 'bad guy' and hence, the audience is not supposed to have an empathic connection with him. In Manhunt 2, the player is the one committing the horrific acts of violence - the very core structure of the game demands it from the player.


    Therefore, in this situation, it is obvious that the BBFC has deemed the greater empathic connection in Manhunt 2 as more problematic than the more visceral, realistic nature of the violence in Hostel and Hostel 2.




    And no toasted muffin for you...
    Edited by 1 at 20/06/07 @ 08:41

  • zuljin #129 5 years ago

    @paul_haine
    "Nudity doesn't equal pornography, that's why - the key is in the word 'graphic', i.e., sexual or 'lascivious' situations or poses. In the case of Innocence, it's just this two- or three-second shot of a girl getting out of a bath, probably wouldn't even be commented on in France."

    Well in all honesty thats what got me confused about Innocence. I thought there were pornographic overtones throughout, but I'm not quite sure why. I guess I just expected the worst from the storyline from the reviews I read beforehand.

    Still, that film worried me... But I can't put my finger on exactly why.

  • miiiguel #130 5 years ago

    bioreit is a BBFC enforcer, he hates sex, and he is "the good guy" whatever that means.

    The leaders of men,
    Made a promise for a new life.
    No saviour for our sakes,
    To twist the internees of hate,
    Self induced manipulation,
    To crush all thoughts of mass salvation
    Edited by 2 at 20/06/07 @ 11:03

  • bioreit #131 5 years ago

    "he hates sex"

    ROFL. Seriously, this one made me and all of my friends giggle.

  • Ranger101 #132 5 years ago

    Rockstar should have gone the whole hog, and had an option for the player to ejaculate over a dismembered corpse. That would've almost every single 'no no' on the BBFCs list, bar kiddies and animals.

    //somewhere in the Rockstar studios a producer reads this comment and shouts out "SEE!!! We shouldn't have taken that out!"
    Edited by 2 at 20/06/07 @ 11:27

  • Ranger101 #133 5 years ago

    Also.. Guinea Pig films... I've read about them.. but thats like.. yikes! Gratiatious torture, dismemberment and snuff purely for sexual titilation and no context. Producers were smart not even bother submitting it for a UK release - though I hear that Customs & Excise will confiscate it, if they discover a mail order.

  • bushwod #134 5 years ago

    @bioreit

    "I'll call you what I damn like - unless you want to DA DA DUN! censor me?"

    Of course I don't want to censor you (but nice attempt at trying to make me sound like a hypocrite).

    I was just exercising my cherished right of freedom of speech by calling you a PRICK for starting you reply with "Shut up, get a clue". You can of course say what you like, that's the beauty of it, but if your going to resort to that kind of language why can't I?

    Ooooohhhh, who's the hypocrite now?

    No really, this thread has been great fun and there's lot of good points going back and forth.

  • Lov3 #135 5 years ago

    @Bioreit: Therefore, in this situation, it is obvious that the BBFC has deemed the greater empathic connection in Manhunt 2 as more problematic than the more visceral, realistic nature of the violence in Hostel and Hostel 2.

    Man, and you still miss the point time and time again. Have you ever played Manhunt 2? No. And you won't be able to either. You have no fucking idea how graphic or violent it is, and you definitely don't know how 'realistic' it is. These things are subjective from person to person, and you sit here and happily give up your right to ever make that decision for yourself, and worse, you feel the need to protect that decision that you didn't make and feel it should apply to me. Well, fuck that, and fuck you for saying that!

    ... obviously I'm aware that this isn't a confrontation between you and me about my rights :p. But when someone makes this kind of sweeping decision they are applying the same rule to 70 million people, many of whom are likely to be smarter or wiser than you, me, or the BBFC reviewers. That to me sounds pretty silly.

  • bioreit #136 5 years ago

    bushwod gets a slice of chocolate cake (ran out of toasted muffins last night).

    This thread has been fun, hasn't it.

    @ Lov3

    I have trust that the BBFC, who in the last decade have really been striving to make realistic, logical decisions, have made the right decision.

    Should that mean that they should never, ever be challenged over those decisions? No, of course not and I have never advocated that.

    But your reaction and that of others is just far too violent in its extreme - and those responses are ill-thought out, and full of the worst knee-jerk reactionism that the Daily Mail is guilty of (albeit approaching the topic from the other side).

    As you so rightly said, I haven't played Manhunt 2 - and neither have you. The BBFC has though (or at least witnessed it being played for substantial periods of time) and they have decided not to rate it.

    They have not stopped anyone from buying it who still wishes to buy it - you can purchase it from Amazon in America, for example - so none of your rights whatsoever have been infringed upon. They have merely made the decision that this game would not be 'safe' to approve.

    I would also like to add that I detest people that constantly bemoan their rights whenever they feel hard done by, yet those very same people seem to display an overwhelming lack of awareness of their responsibilities - we are, as you mentioned, part of a country of 70 million individuals.

    Maybe it's time you remembered that there are other people in this country besides you and that those of us in good positions should help those less fortunate than ourselves, whether they be disadvantaged through poor education, low income, mental illness, physical disability or what - we have a duty to protect them.

    And as I said before - the BBFC didn't go on a massive culling of games after they banned Carmageddon in 1997 - so where is the proof that the banning of Manhunt 2 is but the start of a slippery slide towards totalitarian dictatorship? You can only ever judge people by their actions and so far, I'd say the BBFC is doing pretty damn well.

  • miiiguel #137 5 years ago

    [link url=http://www.amazon.co.uk/One-Stop-Direct-Ltd -Carmageddon/dp/B00004UBUG
    ]http://ww w.amazon.co.uk/One-Stop-Direct-...[/link]

    Was it de-banned?

  • Grogmonkey #138 5 years ago

    The biggest assumption here is that people are capable of making the right decisions. Honestly, how many mistakes does everyone make a day? At least one, i'd wager. I know yesterday, for example, I stayed up until 3am. That was a mistake, because now I'm going to be pretty worn out for the rest of the day. Likewise, everyone here makes mistakes all the time. So, when it comes to deciding what's best for themselves, who's to say that they make the right decision? An example:

    A film/game is developed. It's the single most groutesque, horrific thing ever produced by man. It is horribly indecent (but not anything illegal) and sick and disturbing. The logic of a lot of people here is that you should be allowed to decide for yourself whether or not you buy this piece of media. That, if you're over 18, you are mature enough to make a choice about what you experience. But what if you choose to experience this media, and it's so horrific that you are actually effected mentally by what you see. I don't know, it gives you night terrors, or something. It effects you to such a degree that you maybe need counselling. Clearly, despite the belief that you could handle the media, you made the wrong choice.

    Obviously the argument would be that you made your choice and now you have to deal with it. You messed up, and you gave yourself a complex. But my question is (and I honestly haven't formed an opinion on it yet, myself), in the same way society protects people from each other, does it not also have the obligation to protect you from yourself?

    Personally, I think most people are too stupid to make educated and considered decisions. Elections are a clear example of this (really, how many people actually know about a party's policies before voting? There's a lot of anecdotal evidence that, in America, most elections are won by the tallest candidate with the best hair. I think Kerry is one of the few exceptions in recent memory, and that was during war time, where the rules are slightly different.). But is being too stupid to make the right decision for yourself enough of a reason to stop you making that decision? I don't know.

  • Lov3 #139 5 years ago

    @Bioreit: You don't know me (of course, this is the internet :p) but you'll have to take my word that i've always been an advocate of maximising our civil rights - i'm a 'power to the people' kind of guy. For me this isn't a knee jerk reaction at all, it's always been my political opinion to be against censorship, in all forms that are not specifically harmful to a targeted person.

    Of course there are more important problems in the world than censorship. But this conversation is about censorship, and it's bad form to change the topic of conversation, or assume that i've never given to charity (I have). Besides which, solving those kind of problems fundamentally stems from respect for your fellow man, and if you're intending to limit what they can and cannot do themselves then that is not a good platform from which to begin.

    Finally, the fact that you can get around the law is irrelevant. That does not automatically make that law OK. It's still something I know has been arbitrarily removed from my control, without (I feel) good reason. If you add up all the small liberties which have been removed you end up with a bigger problem that you'd think, and they need to be tackled one at a time if we want change.

  • bioreit #140 5 years ago

    @ Lov3

    You're right, I don't know you.

    But I will say this - your actions of "maximising our civil rights" seems to me (could be wrong) to be on a par with many other people I have met like you, who approach the subject thus:

    I don't care if x causes harm to anyone - tough crap. As long as the principle of rights are protected, that is all that matters.

    Case in point - the recent Google standing up to the US DoJ over COPA. Thousands of people said 'Well done to Google', basically advocating the opinion of "Yes we should protect children, but not at the expense of civil liberties."

    I see it the other way round - "Yes we should protect our civil liberites, but never at the expense of the safety and well-being of our children". Or in this case, the mentally unstable.

    I do understand your points and your objections, but you must understand my position in this:

    I will NEVER be swayed by any of your logical arguments, becuase I cannot allow myself in any act of conscious will or through a lack of similar action, allow the vulnerable to be affected. Neither my personal beliefs nor my occupation allow me to do so.
    Edited by 1 at 20/06/07 @ 13:44

  • bioreit #141 5 years ago

    @ miiiguel

    /Looks at Carmageddon on desk.

    Yup, sure was. Even got a 'blood and humans' patch. Showing that the BBFC will and does listen to public opinion and reasoning.

    Please note this doesn't include mouthing off about them and calling them rude names.

  • miiiguel #142 5 years ago

    humm..., I don't know BBFC, and its decisions dont really affect me, I do buy all my games in UK but just because they come faster than US, and I speak French even worse than english. But it's not really a big deal.
    Although I find it funny that people think that nowdays this sorta decisions have the desired effect. Well it can have, if its purpose is sleeping better dreaming they protected a lesser mind from the dangerous of distasteful art objects.
    Edited by 2 at 20/06/07 @ 15:02

  • miiiguel #143 5 years ago

    IMO, US did the best thing this time, by rating it AO. To ban something is allways a bad call. It wont make people not getting it, and it has a fascist conotation. By rating it Adults Only and with an advert that it contains graphic (although pixelated) content of extreme violence would have been wiser.
    Edited by 1 at 20/06/07 @ 15:18

  • JHuxley #144 5 years ago

    @Ranger101

    Gratuitous torture, dismemberment and snuff...most definitely. Sexual titillation? I bloody well hope not! At least I don't think they were made with that purpose in mind. They're just fake snuff films.

    And it's only really the first two Guinea Pig films that fall in to that category; the other four are just regular horror movies.

    Anyway, I only mentioned them because I thought they were the nearest cinematic equivalent to Manhunt. You can't compare it with Hostel or anything like that because it has as much to do with tone and atmosphere as it does the level of violence.

    PS - I'm not a sicko, honest! The only reason I even know anything about the Guinea Pig films is because of Hideshi Hino's involvement. A few are adaptations of his comics and he even directed a couple. They're surprisingly decent considering the budget.

  • bioreit #145 5 years ago

    New development:

    [link url=http://kotaku.com/gaming/top/adults-only-m anhunt-2-homeless-270768.php
    ]http://ko taku.com/gaming/top/adults-only...[/link]

    Seems like America's rating of Manhunt 2 as 'Adults Only' has led both SCEA and Nintendo to say that, at least in its present state, Manhunt 2 will not be released on their consoles.

  • miiiguel #146 5 years ago

    bioreit: there you go..., society + market working. Ban = bad call.

    For the 1st time I see the power of the PC over the consoles. Try to do this on a PC..., you gotta create some kinda universal BBFC or some sick shit like that...
    Edited by 2 at 21/06/07 @ 10:18

  • Lov3 #147 5 years ago

    @bioreit: I will NEVER be swayed by any of your logical arguments

    Conversation over. I cannot waste time having an argument with someone for whom logic and reason are meaningless.
    Edited by 1 at 21/06/07 @ 18:47

  • bioreit #148 5 years ago

    @ Lov3

    I extended you courtesy by remaining reasonable, you never did.

    You respond with "fuck you". You choose to misinterpret, twist, manipulate and effectively lie just to make your point seem more valid.

    I pray you never have children, for they will surely lead a depraved, wretched existence until they are wrested from their father by an appalled witness. I also feel truly sorry for your parents, to have spawned such a one as you.

    You must surely be a monumental disappointment to them - your pronouncement that you are a 'power to the people' person is obviously a delusion that you have perpetrated for so long that you have started to believe it yourself and as such, you have my pity.

    You clearly have no respect for other people, no idea of how to act towards anyone who shares even a mildly differing viewpoint from yourself. You use the barrier of the Internet and the anonymity it affords to attempt to bolster your obviously low self-esteem.

    If you still wish to have a reasoned debate, I am more than willing to agree. I never once mentioned that logic and reason were meaningless - anyone who knows me is aware of just how wrong you truly are. The fact that I own a website dedicated to its advocacy is evidence of that.
    Edited by 1 at 21/06/07 @ 21:45