BBFC: Who are they rating for?

By Johnny Minkley Published 26 October, 2007

Comparing the BBFC's attitude to film and games.

"Grisly gang film to be screened uncut - Britain's film censors are facing controversy over their decision to allow one of the most violent movies of recent years to be screened without any cuts." So ran an article in the Sunday Times last weekend that caught the eye between televised bursts of English sporting misery.

In short, controversial movie director David Cronenberg's latest flick, Eastern Promises, has been awarded an '18' certificate by the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) in its original form. The film may, we're told, shock some viewers with its graphic depictions of violence; in particular, the story notes, a scene "in which a knife is twisted repeatedly and gleefully into a man's eye". Popcorn with that?

Now, whether or not you care for Cronenberg's methods or content is beside the point. The sane reaction to this news is surely to praise the BBFC for its robust defence of lawful artistic expression and sober faith in a stringent regulatory system designed to prevent minors from accessing inappropriate material, while allowing everyone else to make up their own minds like proper grown-ups. Jolly good show; now what's going on in the Grand Prix?

But hang about: what's this got to do with video games? Well, as you're probably aware, this is the same lot that has now twice refused to classify Manhunt 2, effectively banning it from sale in the UK. BBFC director David Cooke highlighted the game's "unremitting bleakness and callousness of tone... which constantly encourages visceral killing with exceptionally little alleviation or distancing." Right up Cronenberg's street, then.

This was the first games title refused by the BBFC since Carmageddon in 1997, a decision which was overturned on appeal. One would therefore assume it had a bloody good reason, if you'll excuse the pun. Well, back to Cronenberg's movie, and an obvious question is raised: is the BBFC as even-handed as it professes to be?

Great expectations

1

Manhunt 2 has been rejected twice by the BBFC.

Let's take a look at how it defended itself in the Sunday Times article; the devil is in the detail: "'Scenes that make people turn away are part of the fun of going to movies,' a spokesman said. The board added: 'These days we are not here to cut; we are here to provide information and let people then make up their minds ... People also have expectations of what a Cronenberg film is.'"

Oh, really? Now replace the phrases "going to movies" with "playing games" and "Cronenberg film" with "Rockstar game". Yes, you've got it. What the BBFC is basically saying here is: "Yeah, well, we know there's some pretty nasty stuff in it - I wouldn't take the wife along, put it that way! - but everyone knows what a sicko that Cronenberg bloke is. And anyway, it's hardly our business telling adults what they can and cannot watch, is it?"

Given the scale of the Grand Theft Auto series' success, can anyone at the BBFC possibly argue that people do not "have expectations of what a Rockstar game is"? Yet these very same adults are, it seems, not to be trusted with a fuzzy PS2 game.

Now, I happen to think that the original Manhunt is at best an average action game which employs cheap shock-tactics purely as a marketing tool. And it's hard to feel sympathy for Rockstar, a company with an arrogant, cavalier approach to its responsibilities as a leading industry publisher. Certainly, many will have tasted "had-it-coming" schadenfreude with the BBFC's decision.

But this is irrelevant. The wider issue is that there is clearly an audience for this type of product; and if Rockstar chooses to exploit this within established legal boundaries (i.e. no kiddy-fiddling, brutal rape or dog-humping) then that is its right.

The BBFC's David Cooke said on refusing the resubmitted, edited version of Manhunt 2: "There has been a reduction in the visual detail in some of the 'execution kills', but in others they retain their original visceral and casually sadistic nature."

Which begs the question: why are adult filmgoers more capable of "making up their own minds" than adult gamers? A cursory dig around the BBFC's website reveals that this is merely the tip of a hypocritical iceberg which threatens to shatter the games industry's trust in the body.

"Extremely visceral violence"

2

We definitely deserve a new Manhunt after all we've been through.

Allow me to suggest a few answers to the above question:

"Manhunt 2 is basically much more gruesomely shocking than Eastern Promises" - Well, let's take a look at the BBFC's own comments in its September 4th classification notice: "In Eastern Promises there are three key scenes of extremely visceral violence, two images of throats being slit and one of a man's eye being viciously and repeatedly stabbed."

The BBFC adds that it "also contains frequent use of strong language, a single sex scene which lacks strong detail and references to the rape of an underage girl. Finally the film makes reference to the forced use of heroin on an underage teenage girl brought into England with others to work as prostitutes for criminal gangs." Hardly Bambi 2, is it?

Also note that, while Manhunt 2 was originally classified by the ESRB as AO (Adults Only) in the US - which is as good as a ban, since Sony and Nintendo refuse to license AO titles - the resubmitted version was passed as M (Mature).

According to the ESRB's guidelines, "Titles rated M (Mature) have content that may be suitable for persons ages 17 and older. Titles in this category may contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content and/or strong language."

This is a step-down from the 18-plus AO guidance that: "Titles in this category may include prolonged scenes of intense violence and/or graphic sexual content and nudity." Not enough of a stepdown for the BBFC, though. Hmm, okay, let's try another one.

"Eastern Promises is dark psychological exploration as art; Manhunt 2 is just murder for murder's sake" - let's take a look at that BBFC notice again: "These images focus on the actual process of violence in bloody detail and with a clear element of sadism which goes beyond what is suitable at '15' but is suitable for adults at '18'." Yet Manhunt 2's "casual sadism" is unsuitable for adults?

And this is what Cronenberg had to say about audience reaction to the film in a recent interview with The Times: "That's just a nervous reaction... What they are reacting to is the outrageousness of killing. I don't believe in an after-life, so killing someone is an outrageous thing to do, and therefore I show it all, unflinchingly, and that provokes that kind of reaction." Nothing at all like killing for killing's sake, obviously.

"As an interactive medium, gaming poses greater risks" - Let's ignore for the moment the fact that, despite numerous studies, there's not a shred of compelling evidence to support strongly such an assertion. Instead, let's look at the findings of "Playing Video Games", the BBFC's own report into gaming, published on April 17th 2007.

3

Maybe if they changed the axe to a balloon.

Here's a selection of the report's key conclusions:

"Gamers appear to forget they are playing games less readily than film goers forget they are watching a film because they have to participate in the game for it to proceed. They appear to non-games players to be engrossed in what they are doing, but, they are concentrating on making progress, and are unlikely to be emotionally involved."

"While there is an appeal in being able to be violent without being vulnerable to the consequences which similar actions in real life would create, gamers are aware that they are playing a game and that it is not real life."

"Gamers are aware that violence in games is an issue and younger players find some of the violence upsetting, particularly in games rated for adults. There is also concern that in some games wickedness prevails over innocence. However, most gamers are not seriously concerned about violence in games because they think that the violence on television and in films is more upsetting and more real."

"Non-games playing parents are concerned about the amount of time their children, particularly boys, spend playing games and would prefer that they were outside in the fresh air. However, they are more concerned about the ‘stranger-danger’ of internet chat rooms. While the violence in games surprises them and concerns some of them, they are confident that their children are well balanced enough to not be influenced by playing violent games."

So, if gamers aren't worried, nor parents, and the BBFC's own research demonstrated that gaming is less emotionally-involving than watching a film, by what rationale was the decision taken to reject Manhunt 2 while allowing Eastern Promises safe passage? Surely the work of a famously controversial film director isn't receiving more respectful treatment than that of a grisly, trouble-making games company?

It would arguably be reasonable to voice concerns over the Wii version of Manhunt 2 in isolation, since the controller is used to mimic the murderous actions in the game. But the BBFC has already stated it doesn't consider the method of control a major issue. And note David Cooke's comments on the BBFC's report, which are worth quoting at length (my emphasis):

"The element of interactivity in games carries some weight when we are considering a video game. We were particularly interested to see that this research suggests that, far from having a potentially negative impact on the reaction of the player, the very fact that they have to interact with the game seems to keep them more firmly rooted in reality. People who do not play games raise concerns about their engrossing nature, assuming that players are also emotionally engrossed. This research suggests the opposite; a range of factors seems to make them less emotionally involving than film or television. The adversaries which players have to eliminate have no personality and so are not real and their destruction is therefore not real, regardless of how violent that destruction might be.”

Unban this sick filth

4

Cuh, get a room.

Confused yet? Clearly, the overriding concern with mature gaming content is that it does not get into the hands of children. That is why the BBFC exists, and has been successfully and sensibly classifying games for years, as part of the same system that covers film and video.

Working in tandem with the voluntary PEGI system, the UK should rightly be proud of the stringent regulatory process to which all games are subjected, which provides a sturdy defence against the censorious hectoring of the conservative right. Indeed, BBFC ratings appear larger on game boxes than DVD cases as an extra measure in both informing and educating consumers on interactive entertainment.

The BBFC is reviewing its guidelines on classifications across the board over the next year. The UK government's report on mature content in games and children - The Byron Review - is due next March. As an independent body, the BBFC insists it was not swayed by political pressure or fear of a media backlash in twice refusing Manhunt 2 (the original game was linked, wrongly, to the murder of a 14 year-old in 2004). If so, and given its staunch defence of Cronenberg's latest grotesque work, exactly in whose interests was this decision taken?

Many would doubtless be utterly appalled by the knifed eyeballs of Eastern Promises and cheap slaughter of Manhunt 2. Fair enough; and these titles are easily avoided. But there's plenty that would relish such gruesome, harmless thrills - and in a free, democratic society, they should be allowed to enjoy both.

This editorial originally appeared on our sister site GamesIndustry.biz.

Picture of Johnny.

About Johnny Minkley

Johnny Minkley is a veteran games writer and broadcaster, former editor of Eurogamer TV, VP of gaming charity SpecialEffect, and hopeless social media addict.

Read more articles from Johnny by visiting the Johnny Minkley archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (111) Latest comment 5 years ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • NumberNone #1 5 years ago

    The precedent this sets for the games industry is more worrying than losing Manhunt 2 to banned-land. I will be disappointed if this decision leads to a proper piece of gaming art being denied an audience. If only parents would actually enforce the ratings system in their homes this would be a non-issue.
    Edited by NumberNone at 26/10/07 @ 07:53

  • peteb #2 5 years ago

    great article! although I'd take the BBFC over the German USK any day :)

  • themerlin13 #3 5 years ago

    TBH this is the first game to be blocke by the BBFC in about 10 years so I don't think there is anything to worry about yet.
    Yes the BBFC have no idea of consistence at all, but look at it this way, we are only missing a crap game and it gives all the "games are the devils work" tossers a false victory.

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #4 5 years ago

    In the article, the assertion

    "Eastern Promises is dark psychological exploration as art; Manhunt 2 is just murder for murder's sake"

    Is never countered.

    The problem with Manhunt 2, as far as I can see it, is that it is literally the 'murder simulator' that Jack Thompson imagines all violent videogames to be. From what I gather from the write-ups I've seen, it doesn't even have the element of coercion that drove the story in Manhunt 1 (in the form of Brian Cox's controlling snuff-fetishist).

    Cronenberg's film may display peaks of violence with sadistic overtones, but that's quite different to 10 hours of continous searching for and perpetrating casually sadistic, often graphic violence.

    I doubt Manhunt 2 contains a story element equivalent to a nurse trying to return an orphaned baby to its family to counterpoint its series of 'execution kills'

    (Eastern promises review here : http://www.empireonline.com/reviews/revi... )
    Edited by MENTAL1ST at 26/10/07 @ 09:28

  • Killerbee #5 5 years ago

    Great article and sums up the arguments nicely. I certainly believe there are double-standards being applied by the BBFC here and that isn't excused by the "but games are interactive; movies are passive" argument.

    Manhunt 2 was (perhaps justifiably) refused a certificate for its "visceral and casually sadistic nature", but it's hard to see how showing much the same thing in a live action movie as opposed to PS2-standard animation is not one and the same thing.

    I'm not mourning the loss of Manhunt 2 at all, and I will gladly not go and see Eastern Promises, but the BBFC has lost a lot of credibility from this latest story.

  • afghan_jones #6 5 years ago

    Pointless waste of time article.

    Unless you have watched Eastern Promises and played Manhunt 2 in its entirety then you cannot judge the BBFC's decision based on snippets of their press releases on the subject.

    Ive not seen the film or played the game but from the sound of it Manhunt involves far more murders and at a more sustained rate throughout the piece.

  • afghan_jones #7 5 years ago

    Pointless waste of time article.

    Unless you have watched Eastern Promises and played Manhunt 2 in its entirety then you cannot judge the BBFC's decision based on snippets of their press releases on the subject.

    Ive not seen the film or played the game but from the sound of it Manhunt involves far more murders and at a more sustained rate throughout the piece.

  • Rirekon #8 5 years ago

    Good article, mirrors many of my own thoughts on the problem and was very interesting read the parallels with Eastern Promise. Completely agree with other posters that while Manhunt 2 in itself is no great loss it sets a bad precedent for the future of the industry.

  • Saladin #9 5 years ago

    *applause*

    Brilliant article, with some very well set-out points. Those "murder porn" films are getting beyond a joke, with more and more grisely examples coming out every month. For the BBFC to allow them a release (into a cinema system through which those underage can easily gain access) while censoring mature content in games is hypocritical at best, and bordering on the insulting.

  • DanWhitehead #10 5 years ago

    Comparing Manhunt 2 to Eastern Promises in detail is a fairly pointless way of approaching the argument, to be honest. Simply saying "Eastern Promises has violent bits, so does Manhunt 2" is sophomoric. Context is all and, as has been said by Mentalist just above, there are maybe just a few minutes of violence in Eastern Promises that have been deliberately placed there and shot in a certain way by Cronenberg for a specific narrative effect - a narrative that is concerned with far more emotionally mature themes than Rockstar have ever tackled.

    I also think that saying something which "constantly encourages visceral killing with exceptionally little alleviation or distancing" is "right up Cronenberg's street, then" grossly misrepresents his work. His films are known for grotesque imagery, certainly, but his films neither encourage the viewer to enact murder nor do they skimp on placing these acts in a very firm context. Indeed, as a director I'd say Cronenberg is one of those most concerned with exploring and contextualising violence. He's not some giddy splatter merchant.

    The difference between "adult content" and "mature content" really needs to be made clear. There are lots of things that are adult in nature, but that doesn't mean that any portrayal of them is immediately aimed at a mature audience. It's pretty clear that Cronenberg makes his movies with mature adults in mind, but I'm not convinced that the same can be said of Rockstar in this case.

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #11 5 years ago

    I believe that it is right that the BBFC are judging games by a similar scale of context and morality to movies, rather than the US-style checkbox approach that lets an otherwise abhorrent product through because some bits are masked out by screen fades.

    The debate stirred up by Manhunt is important. The BBFC's ruling asserts that game producers have responsibilities to consider what they are creating as a whole, and not just whack some sick gameplay elements together without justifiable context.

    The BBFC commented that its rating of GTA San Andreas would not be affected even if the Hot Coffee content were added properly in the game, partly because the context in which it occurs (as the end-part of a sub-game involving some considerable time wooing a ladyfriend). I think this, coupled with their justification for refusing to classify manhunt 2 illustrates that they are taking games seriously, and I think that's a very good thing.

  • paulf #12 5 years ago

    I think the key point here is the active vs passive debate, this provides a massive difference between film and games ie one you sit back and watch the other you actively participate in. Therefore it's a mute point to compare the two in this way

  • Kryon #13 5 years ago

    <a href=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/leicestershire/3936597.stm>This</a> is the reason for the ban, it has nothing to do with the contents of the game. It's just the BBFC covering their arses. What a bunch of twits.

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #14 5 years ago

    The same BBFC that defended their decision at the time?

    From your article:

    "A spokesperson for the British Board of Film Classification said the game had been given an 18 certificate.

    It was also the board's opinion that there were no issues of harm attached to the game and there was no evidence directly linking the playing of games with violent behaviour."

  • Madafunkola #15 5 years ago

    I think it's also to do with choice - in a film you can look away if the scene is distasteful to you or turn off the DVD (anyone who's seen Blades of Glory?). And sure, in a lot of games you have the CHOICE to inscriminately slay/burn/explode a bunch of pedestrians/villager/sheep. But in Manhunt 2, you HAVE to sadistically kill in order to progress through the game. I very much doubt there would be a 100pt acheivement built in to get through the game without partaking in sadist gory kills.

  • Wellytopp #16 5 years ago

    On YouTube yesterday there were two compilations of all of the executions performed in Manhunt2, sliced and spliced out of context so the whole visceral montage kind of really hammered home the gross ‘Gorno’ of the deaths,…

    A few people I know remarked that as cut scenes go, they were pardon the pun, well executed, which I think doesn’t present them with any brownie points. Someone else I know mentioned that they were some of the best fictitious deaths he’s seen to date acted out for a computer game, mentions of God of War’s ‘fantasy’ deaths for ‘cartoon gore’ were the only next comparison but since that’s a fantasy ‘hack and slash’ it gets pass the censors.

    As far as my feelings went, and yes I was watching these out of context was a morbid fascination that left me feeling dirty inside, they were bloody horrific. Myself personally, I don’t think I could justify working on something like this for how many months that took to make, even thinking that someone even went to the trouble for setting up the Wii remote as a garrote kinda makes me feel sick but hey, for someone who’s played games since the ZX81 surely I can handle it, or am I growing old and am I not down with what the kids want?

    I think what I would like to address is why do designers/publishers that have to really rely on violence as one of its main design mechanics in a computer game? There’s many reasons for this but getting back to the subject of this game and its initial banning one would like people to let it lie and move on, any comparisons to Books/Art/Film and censorship are really grasping at thin air, games are completely different.

    One last comment, last year I happen to visit a few schools in the UK to talk about careers, primarily about the games industry as a possible outlet but after asking a room full of 13-14yearolds what their favorite game was GTA constantly was getting thrown about, if these kids have access in the home environment I hate to think what Manhunt 2 would have. For the record btw I asked them about Manhunt, pretty much all had played that but the style of gameplay isn’t the sort of thing they wanted to play over and over, even tho the executions were mentioned as “What about that bit,..” the shock of the teachers faces who were completely oblivious to such a product then turned on me and said “So are you responsible for these violent games?”


    Btw!!

    Can't wait to see Eastern Promises ;)

  • mk-1601 #17 5 years ago

    The author seems to be asserting that film makers only ever explore violent themes to provide titillation. This fallacy, along with failing to address the actual reasons the BBFC gave for rejecting Manhunt 2, undermines their argument somewhat.

  • Madafunkola #18 5 years ago

    @[eSc]demon
    +1 for comment about these gore-fest films.
    Ignore Cronenburg - who is a very good director, and go after the sensationalist SAW IV. I stopped watching Saw III after the unnecessary graphic scene of Marky Mark Wahlburg SMASHING HIS FOOT TO A BLOODY PULP! Yet they continuously churn out Hostel 2, Vacancy, Paradise Lost (anything where the premise involves 4-6 teenagers getting brutally slaughtered systematically until only 1 survives)... That is the cinema equivalent to Manhunt, not Eastern Promises - leave Cronenburg out of it.

  • Verwandlung #19 5 years ago

    What are they comparing?

    A movie and a game, an apple and an orange..........................................

  • keyboardmonkey #20 5 years ago

    Rockstars next game to be called BBFCHunt? (I think it could just be a rumour)

    The BBFC should classify this as an 18. People don't need to have their minds made up for them as to what is appropriate and what is not.

    It is funny to think that if Rockstar had just made out that all the people you kill are serial killers or Aliens or "Enemies of the Free world"TM they would have quite easily had no problem getting this through the Censors(sorry they aren't called that any more are they?).

    I won't be buying the game anyway even if it does eventually come out, i just find it a little worrying as to how the BBFC can be so picky about what they do allow and don't allow.

  • asphaltcowboy #21 5 years ago

    Interesting article, but I thought it was odd to compare Eastern Promises with Manhunt 2. According to the article, there are only 3 acts of extreme violence in Eastern Promises and the rest is predominantly suggested through references? Surely Manhunt 2 features repeated brutality across the majority of the game?

    I don't know. I happen to think the BBFC is a great organisation and given their record, I trust they have a good reason to refuse Manhunt 2's classification.

    EDIT: Spelling
    Edited by asphaltcowboy at 26/10/07 @ 11:08

  • Talha #22 5 years ago

    Well I happen to believe that the same principles that justify blocking 'kiddy-fiddling', rape of underage girls and the like, also to some extent support banning Manhunt 2. Even if it gets sold with an AO rating, it will certainly land in a house and lie by the console. Or are parents expected to create 'AO' rooms in their homes? And it is a universally known fact that forbidden fruit is often the most sought after. What if an adult, teetering on the edge of an emotional breakdown, gets affected by the game and does what the game is doing? I know most people are sensible enough to distinguish between entertainment and violence, but what about those who can't? Can you fix an age limit on mental susceptibilty?

    I know I am sounding awfully conservative, but ask anyone with children. There SHOULD be boundaries since not all content is fit for exposure. Rape of underage girls is a no-no, you say - well, what did OVERAGE girls do to deserve it?

    You have to draw the line somewhere. Otherwise there should be no lines at all. Cue sadistic sex, incest, occult practices.

    Although I agree - BBFC should look to apply its standards on all entertainment. rap albums that get away with a 'parental advisory' sticker, gruesomely violent movies, gross-out movies that children and teenagers seem to love - they are not ANY LESS damaging than Manhunt 2.



  • keyboardmonkey #23 5 years ago

    @Talha

    You dropped your copy of the Daily Mail

  • Kryon #24 5 years ago

    @Mentalist(air)

    "The same BBFC that defended their decision at the time? "

    Yes, ofcourse they defended their decision, They are hardly going to stand up and say "yeah guys, it was our fault" are they! They just don't want a repeat incident blackening their name further...

    I think it's also to do with choice - in a film you can look away if the scene is distasteful to you or turn off the DVD

    Well as far as I remember, consoles also have an on/off button, if the game is not to your tastes there's no one forcing you to endure it is there...

  • Kryon #25 5 years ago

    @Talha

    "Can you fix an age limit on mental susceptibilty? "

    If everybody saw things this way, all forms of media would be banned altogether.

    A Talha-ban Regime.

    /bah-dum Tishhhh...

  • Kyle #26 5 years ago

    I don't think there was one part of that article that I didn't agree with.
    People need to stop thinking along the lines of 'it was probably crap, so who cares'. As Johnny says, that's not the point. And yes, this may be the first time something like this has happened in ten years, but that's no reason not to worry about it; if it's happened once, who's to say it won't happen again, and with a game people actually care about.
    The bottom line is adults need to be allowed to make their own decisions. If people are worried about kids getting hold of it, well that's what these ratings coupled with good parenting is supposed to avoid. I don't think there's anyone here who could seriously consider out and out banning anything unsuitable for children across all mediums of entertainment just to be sure.

  • Kryon #27 5 years ago

    @Kyle

    Well said :)

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #28 5 years ago

    Like it or not, in Britain we insist that certain bounds of taste and decency are adhered to in our media. No amount of forum posting preaching a libertarian (anarchist?) agenda is going to change that.

    The BBFC are arbiters of what is acceptable, and that's the way it is. I, for one, believe that they have justified themselves well in this case. Taking a majority poll of the population, I think people would support their policies, if not (like Talha and Demon) consider them to be too liberal.

    The impression that I get is that Manhunt 2 is irresponsible and wanton in its dealing with serious and shocking behaviour. A game with scenes as violent and depraved as Manhunt's may one day (even today) be acceptable provided that there is justification for them, but a gratuitous murder simulator (which nothing has yet convinced me that manhunt 2 isn't) is not.

  • Kryon #29 5 years ago

    @Mentalist(air)

    So in your view, I take it you believe the Internet should also be banned. After all, there are many more worrying things that folks can obtain/view via this medium than anything that MH2 offers.

    I'd like to add, I do not believe the majority of people go to a cinema intent on watching films like Saw/Hostel to enjoy the amazing storyline and acting. They go to see the latest gore-fest for the sake of it. The BBFC admit that they believe movies to be more engrossing than games, yet it's OK to watch a gornography movie (for the specific reason of seeing grotesque and nasty visuals) yet not to play the game. I swear, ask the majority of people who've seen Saw why they wanted to see the movie, I doubt it was for the great acting or plot.

  • MaskedDave #30 5 years ago

    So were the BBFC unavailable for comment, or could you just not be arsed to get in contact with them?

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #31 5 years ago

    The majority people who went to see Saw went to be shocked by the actions of the bad men (and women) who got their comeuppance in the end.

    They did not go in order to indulge fantasies of perpetrating torture upon victims, which is what Manhunt 2 invites the player to do.

    And as far as the internet goes, certain things on it are banned, it's just that control of those things is rather difficult. Certain types of pornography in particular, and pirate movies, music and games are both illegal to download.
    Edited by MENTAL1ST at 26/10/07 @ 13:37

  • Kryon #32 5 years ago

    Spin it any way you want. People did not go to see the 'comeuppance' part of the movie, they wanted to see the gore (it's the selling point of the movie). I can see that we are not going to agree about this though so whatever.... (although I'm obvously right)

    By the way, when you play Mario, do you "indulge fantasies of" being a fat Italian plumber or do you just enjoy the game for what it is? I wonder...

    Edit- I repeat, There are many things on the internet (that are perfectly legal) that far surpass anything that MH2 could provide. So you believe it should be banned, so why are you here?



    Edited by Kryon at 26/10/07 @ 13:44

  • Kryon #33 5 years ago

    So you're saying the internet cannot even be controlled, surely even more reason to ban it right?

  • thesombrerokid #34 5 years ago

    if a good game gets made it'll get played regardless of it's legal status simple as that, we grant the BBFC only so much power, and if they sufficently push against the tide they will be relieved of thier position in the games industry, lets face it manhunt 2 got banned because there wasn't enough pressure from us, the BBFC need to flex there muscles a little, better it's on a piece of tripe, the BBFC don't exsist in a bubble away from the games industry they banned it because it was rubbish and no one really appreciates it as a piece of art, it's simply put a bad game and the world is better off without it, i sincearly doubt if bioshock had followed through with it's plans for slaughting children that it would have benn banned because the BBFC is well aware of the public and corporate outrage on the matter and they had to show that they were prepaired to stand up to rockstar, who they feel have been rubbing them the wrong way for years rightly or wrongly so.

    saying that i can see the point that it's important to stand up against the clear double standards the politicians apply to the games industry.

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #35 5 years ago

    By the way, when you play Mario, do you "indulge fantasies of" being a fat Italian plumber or do you just enjoy the game for what it is? I wonder...

    Do I indulge fantasies of rescuing princesses in fantasy lands, flying and riding cute friendly dinosaurs, when I play Mario? Of course I do! I say it is a cold-hearted individual that plays Mario games purely as an excersise in prestidigitation and timing (I can't be having with speed runs).

  • Kryon #36 5 years ago

    "Do I indulge fantasies of rescuing princesses in fantasy lands, flying and riding cute friendly dinosaurs, when I play Mario? Of course I do!"

    So then I take it you've never played any of the GTA games on moral grounds? I hope not or your stance holds no water.

    Imo a game is just a game, nothing more. If I choose to play MH2 it does not mean I fantasize about brutally torturing real people (as is the attitude I would expect any well rounded adult to take)

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #37 5 years ago

    Who doesn't want to be a Ray Liotta in Goodfellas? Whilst you are mostly on the wrong side of the law, the GTA games usually involve a story where you are defeating some other villain who is worse than you are (eg Samuel L Jackson's corrupt cop in San Andreas).

    If you play Manhunt 2, you are participating in a murder and torture fantasy created by the developers, whether you like it or not.

    To compound your opinion of my hypocrisy, I have even been involved with the development of violent videogames that have morally questionable content. But nothing that is quite as objectionable as Manhunt 2 [appears to be], and I would certainly have raised my voice in concern if my project had headed too afr in that direction.

    Edited by MENTAL1ST at 26/10/07 @ 14:38

  • Kryon #38 5 years ago

    So having sex with prostitutes and then killing them to get your cash back is ok? I mean the game encourages you to do it as you get your money back...but that's ok? Yet you believe MH2 is not OK just because the BBFC say so? You make little sense to me mate..

  • Kryon #39 5 years ago

    It's ok to be a criminal and kill people as you please as long as there is a worse criminal out there.... Nope, I don't buy it, sorry but you iz teh not rite innit.

    Edit - out of interest, what games have you worked on?
    Edited by Kryon at 26/10/07 @ 14:51

  • Moz #40 5 years ago

    This still isn't a fair comparison as this is the cinema rating for "Eastern Promises" and it's fairly easy to stop younger people from seeing the film.

    Where as Manhunt 2 is something parent or other adults could by for someone underage.

    It is totally possible that when Eastern Promises goes to DVD that the BBFC will require it to be cut down or even not give it a DVD rating all together, at that time can we make a fair comparison

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #41 5 years ago

    So having sex with prostitutes and then killing them to get your cash back is ok?

    Not really (and I'm surprised that mechanic didn't get them into more ratings board trouble than it did), but that's not all there is to the 3D GTAs. Conversely, there are missions where you act as a pimp, but the player is punished if he beats up upon his own hos. GTA is awash with little moral catches - if you stand in the street throwing grenades at traffic, you'll be set upon by the police.

    The 'unremitting callousness' of Manhunt 2 as described by the BBFC indicates that even these token concessions to morality are absent.

  • bushwod #42 5 years ago

    'It's ok to be a criminal and kill people as you please as long as there is a worse criminal out there.... Nope, I don't buy it, sorry but you iz teh not rite innit.'

    This is the same kind of lazy morality Hollywood use in their tripe films.

    At least in films like Amercian Psycho they present a clearly immoral protagnist, but you are still 'rooting' for him. This is because your emotions are directed artistically, not solely by the morality of the situation.

    If MH2 had done something similar then I can't see any reason they should ban it. Unfortunately, this is a case of a largely non-gaming society not understating a medium enough to know how to handle risky and adult content.

  • Kryon #43 5 years ago

    "but that's not all there is to the 3D GTAs"

    No, you're right, after you've paid for sex to get your energy back and proceeded to murder the hooker with a bullet to the head to regain your cash, you can then continue to steal cars' shoot at innocent people, run innocent people over etc, all encouraged by a cash incentive....and yeah, you can also kill other gangsters if you so choose.

    By your own admission you "fantasize" about these things while playing the game. I'm starting to see the lines of moralistic righteousness blurring in your comments somehow...

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #44 5 years ago

    This is the same kind of lazy morality Hollywood use in their tripe films.

    Actually, it's used in some very good films as well (see how many oscars The godfather got). Stories have glamourised criminals for hundreds of years (Dick Turpin, Rob Roy, Robin Hood), the GTA games and their ilk are just the most modern extension of that. Better lazy morality, though, than unrelenting, unexcused immorality.

    If MH2 had done something similar then I can't see any reason they should ban it. Unfortunately, this is a case of a largely non-gaming society not understating a medium enough to know how to handle risky and adult content.

    I'd say that it's the developers (and production staff at the publisher) who are at fault for not recognising how to couch their game in a way that is acceptable to society.

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #45 5 years ago

    By your own admission you "fantasize" about these things while playing the game

    You are trying to use a very narrow definition of that word. If one did not want to indulge in the fantasy of shooting a hooker, one would not deliberately shoot a hooker in a video game. And I'm guessing the number of people who deliberately resisted the cold-blooded casual murder of poor, exploited sex workers in GTA is (unfortunately for society, perhaps) sadly few.

    But by the same token, there will be very few people who play GTA3 as 'jack the Ripper 2000' and do nothing but screw and kill prostitutes in the game. Partly, perhaps, because less production effort has been put into making their murders as grisly and rewarding as those in manhunt 2, but more because the game mechanic you describe is asimply permutation of free-form gameplay in a much wider game world.

  • Nallen #46 5 years ago

    The BBFC, Jack Thompson, Parents, the Daily Mail. They just don't 'get' games, and as we all know if you don't understand something the best thing to do is just hate it and attack it.

  • Kryon #47 5 years ago

    My point is, what ever way it is spun, GTA is 'morally' wrong ( I don't think anyone can argue that). MH2 is also morally wrong (albeit more gruesome) but the BBFC did not ban it because of the visuals, they claim to have banned it on moral issues (i.e. you are encouraged to be an evil killer and that's not allowed). So how come GTA was allowed, I don't care what anyone says, you do not play a 'goody' in GTA, you are encouraged to kill the innocent for the sole purpose of taking their money. MH2 was banned because the BBFC wanted to cover their arses. That is my view (although I know we will never agree on this)

  • Moz #48 5 years ago

    "The BBFC, Jack Thompson, Parents, the Daily Mail. They just don't 'get' games, and as we all know if you don't understand something the best thing to do is just hate it and attack it."

    WTF! The BBFC on the whole have been very good about computer games, why is everyone barrating them because they decide that one game has gone too far.

    Next you'll be appealing for hardcore porn on primetime TV!

  • SEVQA #49 5 years ago

    "Next you'll be appealing for hardcore porn on primetime TV"

    And why fuck not, we won the fucking war and are in the middle of another! Its our responsibilities to fight for the freedoms we think we have and appeal for any we think we should have.

  • Madafunkola #50 5 years ago

    Without wanting to stir the hornets nest, Killing Prostitutes in GTA games is not the point of the game. In Manhunt, sadistic killing is the point, theme and purpose of the game. So the parallels are minimal.

    Have a nice weekend all - I'm off for post work pints.

  • smelly #51 5 years ago

    Holey Fuck!

    Kryon actually makes a good point when he's not being a blatent troll boy!

  • poisse #52 5 years ago

    Exactly Madafunkola: in GTA you CAN kill prostitutes and old ladies but you don't HAVE to: apparently in Manhunt you do HAVE TO execute people gratuitously and repetitively.

    The editorial does a great job of ripping the censors' argument to shreds but that is not the point: the point is this game will do more harm to gaming and gamers' reputation than it's worth

    If you want us all to be labelled bloodthirsty violent asocials again, go ahead and keep fighting for Manhunt 2. If however you value the progress made in the past 2-3 years de-ghettoising video games please: shut up!

  • smelly #53 5 years ago

    "The BBFC have probably done UK gamers a favour, as Manhunt 2 is probably overated shite anyhow ;) "


    Erm.. Even if it was.. no-one is forcing you to play it?


    ". If however you value the progress made in the past 2-3 years"

    There's been progress in the last 2-3 years of games? I just thought we were getting carbon copy fps and racing gmaes?

  • dudefella #54 5 years ago

    Wow. BBFC, you bunch of total fucking hypocrites. I can't believe this. I'd love to hear their reaction to this (very well-written) article.

  • YourMessageHere #55 5 years ago

    I never killed any prostitutes in GTA (other than reversing into them by accident due to the camera angle =P ). It doesn't "reward" you anyway; it's quicker and easier, and free, to just pick up health from outside the hospital. The only "reward" comes from the way paying a prostitute for sex and then killing and robbing her might conceivably amuse you.

    GTA and manhunt are not comparable on moral terms. I'll invent a statistic right now and say 80% of all games involve killing. Killing is morally wrong. There is, however, an ethics gradient. Killing Germans as a Russian in desperate defence of Russia in CoD is a more ethical killing than whatshisname in The Darkness killing members of his own mob family because demons told him to. Killing gangs in GTA is more ethical than what appears to be killing a string of people in a purposefully cruel way in Manhunt 2.

    Surely this debate is impossible to hold without knowing if the storyline and general presentation of Manhunt 2 is strong and involving enough to make the in-game killings seem justifiable and contextually appropriate, at least in comparison to the likes of gory films. Cronenberg's film seems by all accounts to have a strong and compelling narrative that appears to justify the violence in the BBFC's view, and hence is the main reason why the BBFC are not cutting it. Without knowing how Manhunt 2's plot and methods of storytelling compare, I don't feel I can either support or denounce the BBFC's attitude to Manhunt.

    However, judging by the quoted selections from the BBFCs report, they have no better grasp of the nature of gaming FOR ADULTS (i.e. Manhunt 2's audience) than the average redtop newspaper. For example, I rarely get engrossed in a game unless I am emotionally involved, making progress is not an activity in its own right for me at all. Also, why the hell should wickedness not prevail over innocence sometimes, especially in a game like this? Happens in films all the time. If Manhunt 2 was in fact an exploration of what a wish for vengeance does to the psyche (kind of like the comic-within-a-comic in Watchmen, for example), wouldn't that justify a lot of the sadism and brutality? As it stands I just don't know enough.

    EDIT: Comparison of games and films isn't that inappropriate. They have far more by way of commonality than differences, which is why they use the same machines to display their media, why games-of-films and films-of-games are so prevalent, why some games (e.g. pro league CS and Starcraft) are televised, why the word "cinematic" is used all the time by game developers to describe their own games, and why the BBFC also rates games. Films, especially gruesome horrors, involve risk/reward (risk of seeing something you feel unable to handle/reward of seeing it, handling it and ultimately enjoying it) and many games are equally as linear as films. Films and books are far more disparate media, but everyone compares them without thought, not least the people responsible for the adaptation of books into films and vice versa. All you need to do is keep in mind the limitations, unique capabilities, strengths and weaknesses of each type of media. The terms by which Manhunt 2, Eastern Promises and Saw et al are being compared are entirely appropriate for and worthy of comparison.
    Edited by YourMessageHere at 26/10/07 @ 22:10

  • haowan #56 5 years ago

    argue the point

  • Kryon #57 5 years ago

    "Holey Fuck!

    Kryon actually makes a good point when he's not being a blatent troll boy! "

    Aww, Smelzy baby, I knew you loved me really.

    /wink

  • Kryon #58 5 years ago

    @YourMessageHere

    I never killed any prostitutes in GTA (other than reversing into them by accident due to the camera angle =P ). It doesn't "reward" you anyway; it's quicker and easier, and free, to just pick up health from outside the hospital.

    So I take it while playing GTA you only shot at those who shot at you first? You never stole a car (I mean you don't have to as you are perfectly able to jog) etc... Sorry dude but that's utter nonsense. Regardless of whether it's 'easier' to get health from the hospital, you are still rewarded for screwing hookers and killing the innocent, (you obtain health & cash) you cannot deny this. Come off it, all the people who say "yeah but you don't have to" are just playing devils advocate. In GTA you play the part of a thieving murderous thug, that is the selling point of the game. You can try and deny it but you'll look silly.
    Edited by Kryon at 27/10/07 @ 06:46

  • Kryon #59 5 years ago

    Manhunt 2's story revolves around Dr. Daniel Lamb, a scientist locked in a private asylum by an organization who call themselves The Project. The Project are shady backers of a top secret drugs-based weapons program that Lamb was once associated with. After escaping the asylum with psychotic inmate Leo Kasper, players will be forced to hunt The Project using the brutal cat-and-mouse style gameplay from the original Manhunt.

    <a href=http://www.thewiire.com/news/649/1/New_Manhunt_2_Details_Uncovered>Source</a>

    Doesn't sound like killing the innocent to me... So now which game sounds more 'morally' wrong ?

  • drxym #60 5 years ago

    The BBFC guidelines are fairly clear. Movies are given more latitude than games which are given more latitude than games. The reasons for this should be obvious. I don't see it is a surprise that they ban a game that consists only of murdering one person after another in various sadistic and imitable styles.

    I wish people would stop blaming the BBFC as if it's their fault that Rockstar chose to commit commercial suicide by developing an unratable game. Bitching about censorship is beside the point. The BBFC exists and it's guidelines are fairly liberal. Rockstar had no problems with its GTA titles despite being able to murder hookers and so forth. If they banned this game you'd better believe they had good reason for it.

  • Kryon #61 5 years ago

    "I don't see it is a surprise that they ban a game that consists only of murdering one person after another in various sadistic and imitable styles. "

    I do see it as a surprise when the BBFC clearly states that they believe movies to be more immersive than games. The killing methods in MH2 are gruesome but nothing worse then what we've seen in Saw/Hostel etc and in the context of the game (as I've explained above) you are killing evil people, giving them their comeuppance if you like (pretty much like the story of The Punisher in certain ways) The game was banned not because of content but because the BBFC are trying to save their arses.
    Edited by Kryon at 27/10/07 @ 09:41

  • Optyk #62 5 years ago

    Did the BBFC not have a hand in removing all the Turbans from Hitman?

  • Kryon #63 5 years ago

    Did they? What a bunch of C***S! I frickin love turbans aswell!

  • Ryze #64 5 years ago

    We need to look at what happens when ths game is placed into the console to be played.

    There needs to be a rethink in terms of how violent games are run using the console.

    I know that there are parental controls that can be activated if the owner sees fit, but this is the general public we're talking about here.

    Now, we cant help it if the console is in a child's bedroom and they have free reign over what goes into it an how long it's played for, but many of these consoles are played in the living room.

    Regardless, there should be an un-skippable 20-60 seconds of a full-screen sized Cert '18' logo, along with a BBFC warning about the game's content.

    This should be accompanied by an audio track explaining the content of the game and why it is unsuitable for under 18s. This used to happen with many 18 rated VHS tapes.

    The only way to avoid this warning, would be to use a credit card to activate adult content on the console, in the same way that all of our mobile phone network operators control adult content on their websites.

    It's not too hard to put in place such measures, if there's a will to do so, along with acceptance that this game could easily end up in the hands of children, in the same way that Grand Theft Auto IS.

    /stab, stab, stab!!

  • YourMessageHere #65 5 years ago

    @Kryon

    " So I take it while playing GTA you only shot at those who shot at you first? You never stole a car (I mean you don't have to as you are perfectly able to jog) etc... Sorry dude but that's utter nonsense. Regardless of whether it's 'easier' to get health from the hospital, you are still rewarded for screwing hookers and killing the innocent, (you obtain health & cash) you cannot deny this. Come off it, all the people who say "yeah but you don't have to" are just playing devils advocate. In GTA you play the part of a thieving murderous thug, that is the selling point of the game. You can try and deny it but you'll look silly. "


    Firstly, your logic only works if GTA is considered an RPG, and all owners are assumed to have bought it on the pretext that they wanted to play the role of Claude the amoral criminal. I did not consider it an RPG, and I did not buy it with that wish foremost. I primarily liked the idea of an open city where I could either do the missions or ignore them. 90% of my time in GTA games has been spent not doing missions and not necessarily playing the role of the game character to a fault but simply exploring and enjoying driving around.

    Secondly, of course I stole cars and shot people, that's part of the appeal, if I didn't want to do that, I'd not be playing it. When doing missions, and whenever else I felt like it, I was playing my own version of what I'd be like as a thieving murderous thug, because that's the appeal of GTA for me, that I can do as I wish. If I'm doing that, I'll naturally accept that in the game it's OK to kill people and steal cars, in fact I need to in order to complete any missions, but the game does not require me to visit prostitutes, let alone murder and rob them, and personally I don't have any desire to, so I didn't, just as I depended entirely on spawned weapons rather than ever using the gunshops.

    Third, it's not a reward.

    Screwing and Killing prostitute process:
    -find prostitute in the single red light district in the entire city
    -spend ages beeping at her until she finally gets in the car
    -find somewhere quiet
    -wait not inconsiderable time while the car rocks and money drains
    -kill prostitute
    -get out of car and regain cash lost

    Cash lost: $200 (IIRC)
    Cash gain: same amount paid
    Net gain: $0 + full health
    Net loss: at least 5 minutes, you are now miles from anywhere, killing prostitute added to criminal record

    VS

    Health from hospital process:
    -find one of the many hospitals
    -get out of car and pick up health

    Cash lost: $0
    Cash gain: $0
    Net gain: $0 + full health
    Net loss: maybe 30 sec out of your way, still in the middle of town, no crime committed

    Where is the reward? The only reward, as I already said and you ignored, is whatever amusement the idea of screwing, killing and robbing the prostitute gave you, as otherwise it's a much more arduous process than simply picking up health. You might as well say that you are rewarded in real life for going into a pub, buying a beer and then killing the barman and taking back the price of the beer. Also, it's not as if the game tells you to gain health like that; I never even knew you could pick up prostitutes in GTA until a friend told me about it (as a way to get health - he never mentioned killing them either).

  • Kryon #66 5 years ago

    "You might as well say that you are rewarded in real life for going into a pub, buying a beer and then killing the barman and taking back the price of the beer."

    You know, there are people in real life who commit crime to obtain money, I'm sure they consider this a reward for their actions.

    "Where is the reward?"

    The reward is getting your health back. the fact that it may not be the easiest way of obtaining health doesn't make it any less of a reward. I don't see why this is so hard for you to understand tbh.
    If you're already in the red light district and need energy (like you said it's not that close to the hospital) then ofcourse it can be beneficial to use/kill a hooker. The fact that you didn't know/work this out for yourself is inconsequential...

  • absolutezero #67 5 years ago

    I haven't seen Eastern Promises.

    I have played Manhunt 2 though, its not that bad. I never felt dirty or evil or anything like that, its just a grim dark game.

    It also has a story to tell, one that actually reminds me of Bioshock in that it asks questions about gameplay and our expectations of what a game expects of us.

    You are'nt like Kratos in God of War in Manhunt, your an escaped mental patient with severe delusions, getting spotted will lead to death, so you make the choice extreme killing (which effects the ending, as the player character starts to enjoy it) or just killing to move on and get out (which goes in the opposite direction).

    If you don't enjoy horror, or violence or anything you are'nt meant to then theres no reason for you to be in a topic solely about Manhunt 2, it beggers belief that someone would take the time to post "Well it was going to be shit and I hate gore so good!" and not have any idea of the over-all larger factors.

    Its depressing.

    Everyone here seems to be under the impression that you just wander about killing any old person in Manhunt 2, which is deeply incorrect. Every single enemy that you can kill in the game can and will kill you if they see you, kinda like the cops and rival gangs in GTA. In fact surely killing Police Officers is worse than killing mercs working for a shadey company? Or is it the way that death is inflicted? The sanitised gunning down of many many innocents in GTA compared with the grim over-the-top slaying in Manhunt 2?
    Edited by absolutezero at 28/10/07 @ 01:37

  • smelly #68 5 years ago

    "I don't see it is a surprise that they ban a game that consists only of murdering one person after another in various sadistic and imitable styles. "


    Erm, doesnt that describe pretty much every fps game ever made? If shooting someone in the face (or indeed balls - testikill anyone?) isnt sadistic and imitable then i dont know what is?

    Should they therefor ban halo 3 as well?
    Edited by smelly at 28/10/07 @ 05:09

  • YourMessageHere #69 5 years ago

    @Kryon

    By your logic, if (as a hypothetical example) I called you pointlessly argumentative, stupid and patronising, but said that your use of bold type in your last post was very effective, you have been rewarded. Doesn't quite wash, does it? If you walk into a pub, buy a beer, kill the barman and take back the price of the beer, you are not rewarded, because although you have a beer and your money back, you are wanted for murder, which is bad to a significantly larger extent than a free beer is good. In this GTA situation, while you have full health, you've spent longer than it takes to get from anywhere in the city to a hospital for it, you don't get any more money back than you pay out, and have a murder added to your wanted level. I suppose it's less clear cut, but I'd argue that this does not constitute a net gain, the wanted level raise and inconvenience outweighs the health gain. So, not a reward.

    To drag this slightly closer to the actual discussion, the fact that this game mechanic is obscure enough that I didn't know about it shows that it is not central to gameplay and thus means it is not in the least bit comparable to Manhunt's murders. You cannot use this as an example of how GTA is equally as morally wrong as Manhunt 2 if doing this is entirely left to the player's discretion.

  • Kryon #70 5 years ago

    @absolutezero

    That's exactly what I'm trying to say but certain people don't seem to quite 'get it'...

  • Kryon #71 5 years ago

    @YourMessageHere

    It seems you're getting a tad upset (resorting to 'hypothetical' insults) because someone doesn't agree with you (maybe it stems from the fact that you know your argument holds little water?).
    The fact that you raise your wanted level is not necessarily a deterrent in a game like GTA. Escaping/fighting the police is part of the 'fun', Hence the name Grand Theft Auto. Besides if your character is close to death while in the red light district and you feared you may not make it to hospital, then full health for an extra wanted level at times would seem a welcome trade off - so still rewarding.

    the fact that this game mechanic is obscure enough that I didn't know about it shows that it is not central to gameplay

    Err, did you just order a 'high horse' from Ebay or something? The fact that you personally did not notice the game mechanic merely means that you personally lack perception. Again, anecdotal and inconsequential.

  • Kryon #72 5 years ago

    You cannot use this as an example of how GTA is equally as morally wrong as Manhunt 2 if doing this is entirely left to the player's discretion.

    I never implied that this one singular mechanic makes the two games equal in immorality, it merely adds to it.

    GTA - You're aim is to kill other criminals and the police or anyone else who gets in your way. You are encouraged to kill the innocent to obtain cash/health (you can argue that it is your choice) although if you are about to die and a hooker is near by it may be your only avenue of continuing without dying.

    MH2 - Your aim is to kill the evil people who have done you wrong, not police officers just doing their job, you don't get cash for killing the innocent and you do not get health from screwing illegal street workers. You're sole aim is giving bad people their comeuppance.

    I know which one sounds more morally wrong to me...

  • robg #73 5 years ago

    You've got to be kidding.

    Eastern Promises is nothing like "murder porn" - it has very occasional (and yes, very shocking) moments of violence (I can think of three occasions), but at no point is the violence gratuitous or lingering. It's there (as it is in Cronenburg's previous A History Of Violence) to show how nasty violence actually is; it's not there to titillate or be enjoyable.

    Comparing the sadism of Manhunt 2 with the realism of Eastern Promises is to reduce what could be an interesting argument about censorship to the level of farce. No-one who has seen Eastern Promises should be coming away with the idea that violence is an overriding focus of the film unless they're utterly determined to do so.

  • Grogmonkey #74 5 years ago

    You're not encouraged to kill innocents in GTA. That's why the 'wanted' meter is there. It's a mechanic which says "Yes, you can do what you want, but there are repurcusions for your actions." That's why it's not seen as nearly as bad as Manhunt 2. The BBFC looks at the game and says "Okay, so yes you can kill a whole lot of people, steal cars, deal drugs and all sorts, BUT doing so raises your wanted level and causes the police to come after you." You can argue 'that's part of the fun', being chased around by police (Lord knows that's what I love about the game; the thrill of the chase), but how many people actually get away with mass murder? Once the army is called out, it's only a matter of time before you're killed. Thus, there is a balance: freedom to kill, but consequences for doing so.

    In Manhunt 2, you murder people, sometimes in horrific ways if you so choose, and there are no repurcusions.

    See how there's a big difference?

    It's not about how amoral one game is (Kryon seems to be implying that the BBFC's stance is that Manhunt 2 is too amoral), it's about

    "The bleakness and callousness of tone, ... the essential nature of the gameplay," and "the visceral and casually sadistic nature."

    So, that fact that GTA gives you choice (you don't HAVE to murder everyone, only other criminals. Or corrupt cops), the fact that GTA can actually be very tongue in cheek and light-hearted, and that it's not particularly sadistic are the reasons it was passed.

    As for the actual article, I personally don't think it was particularly well-written. For instance, of the three questions asked that makes up the bulk of the articule, only one was actually answered properly. The other two seemed to dance around the point, failing to discuss Manhunt 2 in any way, preferring to show how Eastern Promises is just as bad. The very fact that there was an attempt to compare three grousome murders in a film to an entire GAME based around grousome murders is laughable at best.

    Having said all that, what I will say is, while I agree in principle with the BBFC's first decision (I have no reason to believe that the BBFC is the corrupt organistion some people are trying to paint them as), I certainly think they REALLY messed up with their press release for Eastern Promises:

    "'Scenes that make people turn away are part of the fun of going to movies,' a spokesman said. The board added: 'These days we are not here to cut; we are here to provide information and let people then make up their minds ... People also have expectations of what a Cronenberg film is.'"

    That is the single most stupid thing anyone could possibly have said. And now they have absolutely no reason not to release Manhunt 2, because they've basically said 'Grown ups can make their own decisions'. I don't know who suggested that that spokesperson makes the comment on Eastern Promises, but they've really shot themselves in the foot. They now have a quotable source that says the BBFC is there only to pass on information, not dictate content.

    So, while before I was all behind the BBFC because at least they were fairly consistent (2 game bans, one of which was overturned, for their entire existence does not speak of jack-booted oppression to me. Especially considering everyone was less inclined to allow violence and immorality in the olden days, thank you Mary Whitehouse), now they have no choice but to release it. Not because Eastern Promises (or any other game or film) is 'just as bad, honest. Look people get shot in it banthissickfilth', but because the BBFC has pretty much said they have to.

  • Kryon #75 5 years ago

    @Grogmonkey

    "You're not encouraged to kill innocents in GTA. That's why the 'wanted' meter is there"

    The problem is, it depends which you value more, cash or keeping the police off your back.

    Cash = Incentive

    Police = Deterrent

    So like I say, it just depends how you look at it. If you can manage to kill an innocent person and lose the pigs, then you have gained money, had a fun car chase and got away with it. Lets not forget that your wanted level falls back to zero after a time. Anyway I except that we are not going to agree about this, and that's fair enough. Atleast you managed to put your point across without resorting to childish insults, which is nice :)

  • absolutezero #76 5 years ago

    Is also worth noting the difference in realism between the two, thanks to vast improvements in special effects im guessing that the scenes in Eastern Promises are very very realistic and as such would be much more piercing and affecting.

    Manhunt 2 is a PS2 title with graphics to match, its blurry and most of the violent scenes consist of hitting an enemy and then blood pouring out, much like a 80's video nasty, theres very little attempt at realism, mainly because its just not possible with the hardware.

    Surely seeing something that looks real happening to a real person would stick with you longer than 2 polygonal blokes hitting one another?

  • Foxclose #77 5 years ago

    "WTF! The BBFC on the whole have been very good about computer games, why is everyone barrating them because they decide that one game has gone too far. "

    Because the game is NOT banned worldwide!
    Edited by Foxclose at 28/10/07 @ 13:20

  • Grogmonkey #78 5 years ago

    @Kryon

    You're absolutely right. I have nothing to argue with, there. Except to add that the very fact the wanted meter IS there is what sets GTA apart from Manhunt 2. In fact, were Manhunt 2 to have a little morality meter or something in-game to put your actions into some kind of moral light then I expect it wouldn't have had the kind of troubles it had. In fact, the GTA cop-o-meter could have been entirely useless and not meant a thing, but the fact that there's a visual representation of what you're doing that's showing you you're commiting crimes and that it's 'bad' would still have set it apart from Manhunt. It's all about perception.

    And context, I guess: GTA - you're killing people, but look there's a little meter that says you're doing bad things. Manhunt - you're killing people, and there are no consequences or indicators to say you're doing wrong.

    Regardless, this time I think we both agree that the BBFC should release it. It's that we agree for different reasons, and only because the BBFC released that stupid statement about Eastern Promises :p

  • Kryon #79 5 years ago

    @Grogmonkey

    Yeah, well, you cant really say fairer then that :) ...I dunno it's just the way I understand the MH2 story, you don't have a choice whether or not to hurt the innocent at all. So there's kinda no reason for a cop-o-meter (I haven't played MH2 but as I understand it your only victims are nasty people who deserve the horrible end you bestow upon them) That's why I don't feel there is a morality issue with the game.

  • Ryze #80 5 years ago

    Forum:

    http://www.eurogamer.net/forum_thread_po...

  • YourMessageHere #81 5 years ago

    @Kyron

    Oh for goodness sake.

    That was an example. You seem to have difficulty with this idea of net loss, so I was using an example closer to home. I apologise if you were offended, the hypothetical bit was intended to prevent that; clearly it was a bad idea and I am sorry. I'm not getting upset, I just don't get how this idea works in your head at all.

    I completed GTA (storywise) without once resorting to prostitutes for health. Others I know did too. Ergo, it is not a central part of the game. So far as I know it's not even included in the vaunted 100% completion stat. No high horse involved, just a basic objective fact plucked from my own experience.

    If, as you say, the wanted level is not necessarily a deterrent, then cash is not necessarily a reward. Most GTA I've played, from reasonably early on I've simply had this vast pool of cash that served not much purpose. Once I completed SA I bought every house on the map and every set of clothes, just to try and use it up, and still had a fair wad left. It was never an incentive for me. You may percieve it as an incentive or reward because you played the game differently from me; that doesn't make it a fact.

    Once again, if something exists in a game for you to do, the game is not encouraging you to do it. You may feel encouraged to do it because you personally value the consequences of doing it higher than the consequences of not doing it, but you cannot claim that the game encourages you to do it.

    However, if a game REQUIRES you to do something, that's different. GTA is sometimes tongue in cheek and requires ridiculous (murderous) things of you that are obviously not intended to be taken seriously; sometimes it is serious in tone. These parts always involve you vs. someone clearly painted as "worse than you". Manhunt is always serious in tone and from what I read does not necessarily paint any of your victims as "worse than you" (I may of course be wrong, it's all contextual, and since it's banned, nobody can really know the context). Clearly, this is the game encouraging/requiring you to behave in a morally worse manner.

  • absolutezero #82 5 years ago

    "(I may of course be wrong, it's all contextual, and since it's banned, nobody can really know the context)."

    You are, it'll become clear once the American version is released of course, and the entire thing is'nt exactly black and white either.

    The game plays on the fact that you are an escaped mental patient, are those shadey people out to get you, or are they guards trying to restrain you? Are you hitting back against a corporation that has hugely wronged you or are you simply insane?

    Those things, to me personally are quite interesting themes for a video game of all things to explore. No cares about that though, you kill people in horrible ways. Boo down with this sort of thing.

  • ploboy #83 5 years ago

    I dont think the major problem is about the content/context of the action, but the action in itself.

    When i´m playing, say splinter cell, i´m not fantasizing i´m a special agent and what not. I have to wake up an go to work in the next morning, i dont have time for that. I only use the story to make sure i´m not scizofrenic and the fact a play a guy with a sexy robber suit running from other guys, makes sense. The real fun are in the play factor.

    The same happens with okami. Am i a dog goddess saving the world? Do i even have some close feeling to that? Sorry, but no.
    I play it for the story itself, like a reader of a book and of course the play factor. Am i anxious to save the world? As much as in any movie or book.

    So here´s my question: when a kid kills his best friend, does he do it thinking he's God of War? Does he use it as reference like me good, you bad, gta vs MH2 style? My bet is, he does not. I think it´s curiosity plain and simple. Any kid wants to know how the world works. Some wants to know how the animals work, and a few wants to know how his best friend work. I dont know about u, but i know a few storys that happened in the country pre-console times, so this is nothing new. And the fact that we all - or most of us - live in the city does'nt makes us homo supremus. We´re still the same old homo sapiens sapiens as our grandfathers. Our capacity to understand good from bad is the same.

    But what if you´re playing a 20 hours torture/killing game, even if the story supports the actions? Does it click in you? It´s not the story, it´s not the realism. It´s the curiosity... a kid can blow up a toad, burn a rat, etc.

    That´s my guess.

  • YourMessageHere #84 5 years ago

    @absolutezero

    OK, well that does change things somewhat. Is it actually a good story told well, or do you get the sense that it's more like an excuse for the gameplay? The ambiguity of it does seem like a very interesting thing to explore via gaming, but I can't shake the idea that a less violent, less controversy-courting plotline could do the same thing better. Perhaps more relevantly, is sadistic/gruesome death inherently necessary for the game to ask the kind of questions it asks and create the kind of ambiguities it creates?

  • Bidermaier #85 5 years ago

    "great article! although I'd take the BBFC over the German USK any day"

    Dont forget that in Germany they can still legaly buy whatever they want if it is not against the criminal law.
    The game wont be hyped. It wont be on a shelf. But if you ask for it and you are ADULT the will sell it to you.

    Here we are stuck in 1984 yet.

  • Saii #86 5 years ago

    I'm sorry Johnny but I don't rate your article. From the biased stance taken and the written language used it becomes apparent that you haven't watched the movie yourself but have relied on assumptions and information quoted from the Sunday Times. You've also made guessworks on associations because of the name "Cronenberg" is tied to this movie. We, as gamers, hate it when just uninformed statements are made about our beloved interactive media so to see this here feels like a shot in the foot and hypocritical. Shame on you Johnny, you're better than that :)

    I happened to have seen Eastern Promises in the cinema last night and, despite the scandal-hunting of the Sunday Times, it was actually a very human and powerful film. If you were to compare to his earlier works, you find it hard to believe this is a Cronenberg. There are very few scenes of violence [etc] but those that are there are completely in context and have a deliberate purpose. The aforementioned "Eyeball" piece mentioned here and championed by the sensationalist press is actually a brief moment during an act of self-defense of the type you see alot in the Bourne trilogy and the most recent Bond film.

    Manhunt2, according the materials on this site, is not justified or contextual violence in any shape or form. In fact, it has even less context than the previous Manhunt.

    "We were several levels into the game, so perhaps the story may have been slightly out of context, but I honestly couldn't see how there was any logical justification for your character's slaughter of everyone and anyone in such a sadistic manner."
    [link url=http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=79323&page=2
    ]http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?art...[/link]

    I'm not going to make any claims about Manhunt2 as a game outside of it's position as a focal point for controvosy. Going on what has been said here I would propose that a more fitting comparison is the SAW sequels [not the Original which is a good piece of criminal story-telling a psychological thriller].

    The point I'm trying to make here is that I just don't feel that this article is up to the normal standard of EG and GI that I find here. Occasionally I do find some things written that feel like a knee-jerk reaction and bordering on a rant but that's fine. It's when something is misinformed or "WRONG" that really irks me and if I see bs I tend to call it.

    So Johnny, if you have seen Eastern Promises then I take back what I've said here. If you haven't, so see it. It's a damn good movie that does for Russisn Mafia in London what the Godfather did for Italian's in New York.
    Also, don't base your writings on everything you read in newspapers. You really have to take these guys with a pinch of salt sometimes ^_^

  • Ryze #87 5 years ago

    Forum:

    http://www.eurogamer.net/forum_thread_po...

  • RazorObsession #88 5 years ago

    I used to pick up prostitutes in GTA, drive them out to the country side and then murder them with a chainsaw. I always bought the camera with me so that I could take pictures of their freshly slain corpses. I had a really big collection of photos actually.

    Point is, its all in good fun, and if you get some of the sicker shit in your head out of the way in the safety of a video game, you are not going to crave that sort of thing in RL.

    Ban these kinds of games however, and you might just make me angry enough to leave the house with my camera...

  • kangarootoo #89 5 years ago

    @keyboardmonkey

    "i just find it a little worrying as to how the BBFC can be so picky about what they do allow and don't allow."

    Is that really what you meant to say? Seems to me that the purpose of a certification board is to be picky. Are you actually suggesting they were inconsistent?


    Someone made reference to the foot bashing scene in Saw3. I actually think (although overall it wasn't a great film) that the scene in question was quite valid. Here is a man who needs to escape desperately (no more detail to avoid spoilers) and so has to harm himself brutally in order to do so. The purpose os the scene is to show how important it is that he escapes, and how he mades the harddescision in order to do so. The viewer is supposed to think "Jesus that is harsh, could I do that if it were me", and if the scene were not graphic and disturbing the thought would not be so effectively placed in the mind of the viewer. That was entirely the point.


    @Nallen
    "The BBFC, Jack Thompson, Parents, the Daily Mail. They just don't 'get' games, and as we all know if you don't understand something the best thing to do is just hate it and attack it."

    Bad examples. Jack Thompson is an insane bigot, whose his behaviour is driven by his personal issues, and the Daily Mail is just a profit making company serving their readership with an editorial that suits them.

    The BBFC on the other hand "gets" video games entirely, and are probably one of the most informed certification boards in the world when it comes to the subject. I've read their manifesto, attended talks by them and chatted with some of their people in person. Everyone who doubts that overall they are on "our side" should probably do a tiny bit of resaearch.

    Everything that results from living in society is based on give and take. I'm not suggesting that the BBFC weren't consistent in their treatment of MH2, but even if they had been influenced by public feeling they are always walking a tightrope. If they allow something like MH2 through, the resulting public upset undermines their position. If the BBFC were ever pulled out of rating video games off the back of great public uproar about one of theirdesisions, you can bet the replacement body would be far worse.

    I know people like to dig their heels in sometimes, but if you can't play nicely with everyone else you sometimes just end up in your room with no toys at all. If refusing certification for MH2 means games in general can be held in higher regard by the general public, I have to say that all things in balance its probably the right choice.

  • kangarootoo #90 5 years ago

    @SEVQA

    "And why fuck not, we won the fucking war and are in the middle of another!"

    You see, right there a flashing light started spinning by my desk.



    @Saii
    +1

  • RexRunti #91 5 years ago

    What a rediculous article. The BBFC have consitently referred to the tone of Manhunt 2 as the main reason for banning it not that it had three very violent scenes. In fact if you replaced "Eastern Promises" with "Bioshock" the article would essentially be the same except the arguments made would be even weaker (if that's even possible).

    And Kryon your whole argument seems to be the BBFC allowed GTA therefore the BBFC hates gamers. OK you think they're being inconsistent and think GTA and Manhunt 2 are essentially identical but then say (and I quote) "I dunno it's just the way I understand the MH2 story, you don't have a choice whether or not to hurt the innocent at all."

    There have also been arguments that this game is available elsewhere in the world so it should be OK. I can pretty much gaurantee that a (real) Japanese game called "RapeLay" would be banned over here as well despite being available in Japan.

    Finally I am actually of the belief Manhunt 2 should be published (as I believe in ratings but not censorship) but attacking the BBFC for inconsistentcy or being too nanny-state (despite being 100% independent from the government) is not the way to do it.

    Edit: Saii + 1
    Edited by RexRunti at 29/10/07 @ 15:21

  • Kryon #92 5 years ago

    OK, I just seen the 'kills' on EG-TV. They're laughably tame. Honestly, this being banned is a joke. Callousness of tone my arse.

    BBFC - "Boohoo, we always get the blame when some tarded kid kills his mates, I know, lets ban this game for no reason coz then no one can blame us any more, *snivel* ...*whimper* ..."

  • Kryon #93 5 years ago

    "GTA and Manhunt 2 are essentially identical"

    Yeah, Rex, coz that's exactly what I said isn't it....If you're going to try and twist what I've said then there is no point me giving you a considered response...Mong...

  • kangarootoo #94 5 years ago

    @Kryon

    Are you suggesting that you can consider the overall tone of the game, and the degree to which this tone is consistent throughout, based on just a few clips?

    Do you reckon thats all the BBFC do? Ahh, I get your point now, what a bunch of nobs. Down with the BBFC, etc.

  • Kryon #95 5 years ago

    @Kanga

    Even if the game is just a continuous re-run of those 'kill' scenes, the tone does not strike me as any more 'callous' than a Tom & Jerry cartoon.

    This ban is a joke. FACT!

    To be fair though, to answer your question, from what I've read and the trailers and clips I've seen, I'm pretty sure that I can ascertain roughly what to expect in terms of the games 'tone'...so yeah.

    I'd just like to add, if I had to make the choice of whether to let my children play MH2 or let them watch the Saw trilogy and both Hostel films. They would be playing the game, no question about it.

  • smelly #96 5 years ago

    @Kryon: I'm shocked you'd let your kids play a WII game? :-)

  • RexRunti #97 5 years ago

    @Kryon
    "This ban is a joke. FACT!"

    This ban is controversial and devisive. Fact.

    How about you at least open you mind to the possibility that the BBFC isn't Big Brother with a copy of the Daily Mail by looking at the BBFC website before grabbing the tourches and pick forks and decending into name calling.

    That said at least all your arguments have been better than those made in the main article. There is some logic in comparing two violent R* games and all though I feel your conclusions are a little wide of the mark the main thrust of your point doesn't rely on hearsay and conjecture.

  • Kryon #98 5 years ago

    @Smelly

    My child would never ever play the Wii version, My Mrs plays the Wii while the rest of the family laugh at her and call her teh ghey XD

    @RexRunti

    Yeah, soz about the "mong" thing Rex but I felt you purposely tried to simplify the meaning of what I've been trying to say in an attempt to score points, if that wasn't your intention then I retract the whole "mong" thing.

    Tbh, I think alot of us seem to agree but just see things from an opposite spectrum...

    Lol, I just said 'spectrum' which for some reason reminds me of the Wii which for some reason makes me LULZ. Smelly used to have a spectrum (rather than a C64) it seems that 25 years on, nothing has changed as now he owns a Wii, the lovable rogue still settles for second best ;-)

  • megamixer #99 5 years ago

    While i disagree with the fact it is more or less been banned I really don't see what the fuss is about. The first game was pure rubbish and I would say the second isn't going to be much better. If people want the game they should be aloud to but the parents are to blame with games getting into young hands and If their were tighter restrictions on game sales i.e if their is an adult in the shop with a kid going nuts for a GTA or another such game then the owner or the shop/company should be legally held to account. Then maybe when their has been a few law suits they will think about who they are selling the game to. Don't get me wrong games for all tastes should be aloud if you want some mindless sex of violence and are old enough to deal with it in a normal way then what's the problem. It's only when children get their grubby little hands on it and talk about it at school playground then the media gets wind and ruins it for the adults. Yet it's the adults that are to blame so it serves them right.

  • Kryon #100 5 years ago

    "tighter restrictions on game sales i.e if their is an adult in the shop with a kid going nuts for a GTA or another such game then the owner or the shop/company should be legally held to account."

    Well, if a sales assistant sells an 18/15 cert game to an underage person then they are personally liable to receive a (I believe) 5k fine (considering retail assistants are usually on a minimum/close to minimum wage) that's a serious amount of money, infact, almost half a years wages. So I don't really think they can make that any tougher. As for parents who buy for their children, that responsibility falls wholly on them. The problem is, there is no way to enforce the law where parents are concerned. Every household has some form of adult media or another, be it literature, movie or game but there is no way of proving whether said media is being used responsibly within the home.

  • kangarootoo #101 5 years ago

    It might be worth mentioning somewhere along the lines that the game has NOT been banned.

    The BBFC has refused to grant certification, and the platform holders have refused to allow publication on that basis.

  • kangarootoo #102 5 years ago

    @Kryon

    A point made perfectly clear by the BBFC was that the callous tone etc was "relentless". Seeing a bunch of clips gives you no context for their frequency within the title, or any sense of what percentage of gameplay includes them.

    It is not just the level of violence that the BBFC objected to. In fact the pure gore was not the key issue for them. They keep saying this, in words of english, which in turn get quoted all over the shop. How is this not sinking in?

  • Kryon #103 5 years ago

    Blah blah blopity bloo etc. Kanga, I did actually just explain that my views are not only based on the three 'kill' clips but on reviews and watching quite a bit of gameplay footage, trailers, etc. Have a look on Youtube. If you cannot work out the general tone of the game via the methods I've just explained then I'd say you're possibly not quite with it.

    So, I repeat, the tone does not strike me as any more 'callous' than a Tom & Jerry cartoon.

  • Kryon #104 5 years ago

    "the game has NOT been banned. The BBFC has refused to grant certification"

    So the BBFC as good as banned it then. Anyway, tell it to GamesIndustry.biz..

    The BBFC has rejected Rockstar's Manhunt 2, banning the controversial title from sale anywhere in the UK

    [link url=http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=77988
    ]http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?art...[/link]

  • Amazing Bryan #105 5 years ago

    "You are free, free to do what we tell you to do."

  • kangarootoo #106 5 years ago

    @Kryon

    Reviews, gameplay footage and trailers? And that is supposed to give you enough info to whine at the BBFC about their thorough review process? I really don't know to say to that.

    Have you read the BBFC report on the game? Your Tom and Jerry compoarison suggets not. If you have... well, again I am at a bit of a loss.

    "Blah blah blopity bloo"

    Well, nice to see we are keeping it adult. Top work. Isn't "blah blah" the text equivalent of just sticking your fingers in your ears and singing "laa laa"? Good change of tact though, that will stall common sense for a minute or two whilst we all learn to tie our shoelaces for a second time.

  • Kryon #107 5 years ago

    Reviews, gameplay footage and trailers? And that is supposed to give you enough info to whine at the BBFC about their thorough review process?

    It is certainly enough for one to ascertain the tone of a piece of media. Seeing as the tone of the game is what the BBFC claim the main problem is, yes, I do feel I have enough info to criticize their decision. The only thing one cannot ascertain from watching a game is how it's playability fares (you'd have to actually play it to work that out) but all else can definitely be analysed merely by watching and listening.
    If you'd read the previous posts there are others who do actually own the game and who also believe the ban is uncalled for, what would your argument be to those individuals?

    Have you read the BBFC report on the game?

    Yes, I have and I believe it to be laughable and insulting in the light of certain other pieces of media that they have seen fit to adorn a rating to. (as I've already said).

    Well, nice to see we are keeping it adult.

    I just get bored of answering the same questions over and over again, if you'd have read the whole thread you would realise that many of your points have already been covered, hence the "blah blah" thing.

  • Kryon #108 5 years ago

    I find it extremely odd that anyone could so vehemently defend an organization like the BBFC (unless you work for them). They are just as likely to pander to the media as anyone else and in this instance it seems totally obvious (to me) that this is the case.

  • kangarootoo #109 5 years ago

    @Kryon

    I can confirm I don't work for the BBFC, neither does anyone in my social circle.

    We are going round in circles a bit, so I'll concede to your bloopity blop comment (and I did chuckle when you used that on someone else ages back, so clearly I am just biased in this case).

    I would say though that when something "seems totally obvious", one of several possibilities is usually the truth, and not often the obvious one.

  • t8yman #110 5 years ago

    I was stood behind a horrible fat mess of a woman in gamestation last week, listening to her telling her 2 eight year old boys that "you should really be 18 to play these" as she handed the money over the till.

    THAT is why manhunt is banned, no other reason what so ever. Shitty parents that dont know the half of what their kids are soaking up.

  • kangarootoo #111 5 years ago

    "you should really be 18 to play these"

    That makes it even worse! She can't evene claim ignorance, and has to default to apathy.

    "Well I gave him fore warning, and just left the decision making to him".

    Modern parenting in action. \o/