Manhunt 2 banned in UK

By GamesIndustry International Published 19 June, 2007

BBFC says no.

The BBFC has rejected Rockstar's Manhunt 2, banning the controversial title from sale anywhere in the UK, GamesIndustry.biz is reporting.

Both PlayStation 2 and Wii versions of the game have been banned, with the BBFC unable to recommend cuts or removal of content to make it suitable for public sale.

"Where possible we try to consider cuts or, in the case of games, modifications which remove the material which contravenes the Board's published Guidelines. In the case of Manhunt 2 this has not been possible," revealed David Cooke, director of the BBFC.

"Manhunt 2 is distinguishable from recent high-end video games by its unremitting bleakness and callousness of tone in an overall game context which constantly encourages visceral killing with exceptionally little alleviation or distancing.

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

The BBFC has stated that the sequel to Manhunt is far more brutal and bleak than the original title, which was granted an 18 rating in 2003.

"Although the difference should not be exaggerated the fact of the game's unrelenting focus on stalking and brutal slaying and the sheer lack of alternative pleasures on offer to the gamer, together with the different overall narrative context, contribute towards differentiating this submission from the original Manhunt game," added Cooke.

"Against this background, the Board's carefully considered view is that to issue a certificate to Manhunt 2, on either platform, would involve a range of unjustifiable harm risks, to both adults and minors, within the terms of the Video Recordings Act, and accordingly that its availability, even if statutorily confined to adults, would be unacceptable to the public."

The last game to be banned by the BBFC was Carmageddon in 1997. Publisher Rockstar has the right to appeal against the BBFC's decision.

Picture of GamesIndustry.

About GamesIndustry International

GamesIndustry International is the world's leading games industry website, incorporating GamesIndustry.biz and IndustryGamers.com.

Read more articles from GamesIndustry by visiting the GamesIndustry International archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (180) Latest comment 5 years ago

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

  • Disco_Stu360 #1 5 years ago

    Shocker!

  • Have_to_Speak_Up #2 5 years ago

    damn it, now I'm going to have to kill someone for real

  • Scurrminator #3 5 years ago

    lol, lame. pr stunt.

  • UmBongo #4 5 years ago

    Nice. About time they did something usefull instead of being a shoe slipper of corporate capitalism. BBFC has been asleep lately and plus rockstar needs taught a lesson.

  • Wayne #5 5 years ago

    I can't help but laugh at a game getting banned that's on the Wii!
    Kiddy console??? How many 360 or PS3 games have been banned?

  • CivilD #6 5 years ago

    Free PR, get it while it's hot!

  • Rayn #7 5 years ago

    sales +1gazillion

  • afghan_jones #8 5 years ago

    Thats a kick in the nuts. quite liked the last one. Was good to play a game that was properly dark.

    Oh well, at least it will stop all us crazed gamers playing it, going mental and strangling the neighbours cat with our shoelaces, or whatever the fuck JackThompsonites think gamers get up to after playing Mario for five minutes.

  • robg #9 5 years ago

    I MET SOMEONE WHO PLAYED A VIOLENT COMPUTER GAME AND DIDN'T THEN GO AND KILL SOMEONE SO THEREFORE ALL GAMES ARE FINE FOREVER I HATE THIS NANNY STATE!

    Thought I'd get some stupidity out there before anyone else got the chance. For the more reasonable amongst us, this still sounds fairly heavy-handed, but it's hard to know whether it's justified. Debate on whether random people we don't know should arbiter what is/isn't considered immoral content, anyone?


    ...

    Dammit too late.
    Edited by robg at 19/06/07 @ 12:28

  • bushwod #10 5 years ago

    Translation: We're too shit scared to release this after the fiasco involving the media last time.

    Hooray, we're living in a nanny state.

  • Darren #11 5 years ago

    The original game which I played on the Xbox wasn't all that great anyway, highly repetitive and designed to be as shocking in a controversial way as possible, so I wasn't holding my breath for the sequel. That fact that it is appearing on the Wii is the most surprising thing really, I'd have thought that Nintendo wouldn't want a game of Manhunt's reputation appearing on their family-friendly console... :?

  • northernlights #12 5 years ago

    Im glad to see there is someone out there telling me what is suitable and not suitable for me. As an adult Im not responsible for my actions and anything that promotes violence is sure to have a negative effect on me. Goes back to playing Viva Pinata

  • KingOfSpain #13 5 years ago

    TBH the BBFC is normaly very good with this sort of stuff. They have in the past defended the industry and these types of games. They are much bettter that other boards abroad (looking at you Germany)

    I still think that I should be given the choice as a 25 year old adult to buy the game if I wish.

    Maybe there should be another rating that basicly states that you have to go through testing before you can buy

  • Ihya #14 5 years ago

    Whoa, here we go... I might actually buy a wii for this game now!

  • leedavies #15 5 years ago

    Typical. The bunch of disconnected old farts known as the BBFC strikes again.

    This country is ridiculous when it comes to censorship. Let us decide what we want to watch. We don't need a bunch of oldies deciding what we can and can't watch.

  • afghan_jones #16 5 years ago

    @northernlights

    Just make sure you dont start whacking those fudgecrows or whatever theyre called with a shovel.

  • menage #17 5 years ago

    Yeah, another question, do we really need overly violent crap? Come on. It's not like it's going to make the gameplay any better.

    And why not ban movies like Hostel 2 then, that's the other side of the coin.
    Edited by menage at 19/06/07 @ 12:34

  • Wayne #18 5 years ago

    Has anyone considered the fact that this game really might be too sick and immoral, and that the BBFC are actually just doing their job, and doing it well. Considering this is the first game they have banned in 10 years, maybe the game really is worthy of being banned.

  • MrBiggles #19 5 years ago

    Good, ban this sick shit.

  • bdc #20 5 years ago

    Must've been a rubbish game anyway.

  • CannonAnBall #21 5 years ago

    Unfortunately there are loads of crazy fucks out there, and these same crazy fucks can be swayed even by a video game.

    It's harsh to us normal folk but you only have to go out on a Friday or Saturday night to spot the amount of bell-ends about.

    Just cos you might be normal means shit all in this fucked up little country of ours!

  • MrBiggles #22 5 years ago

    Nobody wants to hear the voice of reason Wayne, they just want blood.

  • richardiox #23 5 years ago

    Can now join the ranks of Super Paper mario for Wii games we will never see released here :(

  • afghan_jones #24 5 years ago

    Bottom line, I think the issue is that games are very poorly regulated compared to other age rated material.

    Cinemas are generally pretty tight on ID'ing people for 15, 18 etc but games retailers are rubbish. Plus parents seem to ignore age rating for games completely. Ive lost count of the times Ive been in game and had someone buying Gears of War or whatever for their 8 year old son who is blatently right next to them. Shops dont care and parents dont seem to care either.

    If Manhunt2 was released as an 18, kids would be able to play it with ease.

    I guess the other point to note is that none of us have actually played or seen it and it might well be too horrible to release. (Just dont do a 'carmageddon' and make the bad guys zombies....)

  • Stormflood #25 5 years ago

    Yeah, another question, do we really need overly violent crap?

    I don't think so. I respect the BBFC decision. If anything, they are protecting the industry from the ignorant masses who think all games are like Manhunt.

    And why not ban movies like Hostel 2 then, that's the other side of the coin.

    One is created to scare you, the other is participation for fun. Sure, you're not actually killing anyone, but the game has no other purpose than to serve gratification for doing so in a virtual context.

  • bushwod #26 5 years ago

    @KingOfSpain

    I have to agree, in recent years the BBFC have been pretty good, which makes me very suspicous about their reasons for banning this game.

    I'm sure if this were a horror film it would be allowed. Is that hypocrisy? I've heard no actual evidence to suggest that games affect adults more or less than films do (and speaking personally, I find films much more effecting as there is a greater suspension of disbelief than I get with games).

  • millerlfc #27 5 years ago

    Was Carmegeddon actually banned? I seem to remember playing it on the PC a few years back.

  • Hunam #28 5 years ago

    It got overturned, but for awhile you couldn't buy the red blood one.

  • Ranger101 #29 5 years ago

    Actually, naysayers, the BBFC is pretty liberal and lenient usually. If there is no redeeming factor in the gameplay and violence, and the game engulfs the player ina violent world and infact encourages the player to perform violent actions without any form of deterrent showing up anywhere, as is suggested - then I reckon they've done a good job.

    I understand that a lot of you think this is 'nanny state' action, but really, think about it it from the perspective of the mental health people.

    Also, the difference between the video game and film comparison, is that one is passive and the other is active. If Hostel 2 encouraged people directly to act out what was going on, then it would be banned. Also, I assume, from watching films like that, Hostel is a film that makes the audience empathise with the victims as opposed to the people carrying out the torturing.
    Edited by Ranger101 at 19/06/07 @ 12:47

  • ManicDrunkMonk #30 5 years ago

    Recent experience of the BBFC has shown them to be quite thoughtful about their certificates with regard to video games.

    Personally though, unless it's showing something truly horrifying (sexual abuse etc) then no game should be banned entirely. An 18 certificate tells everyone that the game could well be grotesque in nature.

    I don't mind certificates, just hate censorship and banning.

  • CallousB #31 5 years ago

    Banning = Piracy/modded consoles/importing software



  • El_MUERkO #32 5 years ago

    WHAT!?! BANNED!?! AGH!?!

    /pirates

    /leaves copies outside school gates

  • tuff #33 5 years ago

    The original Manhunt was crap anyway.

    Ban this sick filth..........

    Ohh, you have

  • bushwod #34 5 years ago

    @CannonAnBall

    "Unfortunately there are loads of crazy fucks out there, and these same crazy fucks can be swayed even by a video game.

    It's harsh to us normal folk but you only have to go out on a Friday or Saturday night to spot the amount of bell-ends about.

    Just cos you might be normal means shit all in this fucked up little country of ours!"

    Your argument is flawed.

    Of course there is, and will always be, violent and unstable people and I don't doubt some of them would get a kick out of this game on a very disturbing level. But if you ban this game they will just play others,
    or watch horror films
    or snuff movies on the internet
    or read books about serial killers... etc

    To suggest that this one game would push all these people over the edge is completely unrealistic. By your logic we would have to ban ALL violent material and live in a world without art.

    The real problem, as afghan_jones pointed out so well, is that there is no real control other age rated video games. Until parents and retailers take proper responsibility over this the industry will continue to suffer.

  • Tomo #35 5 years ago

    Blimey. This is pretty surprising tbh. I'm a bit annoyed because I enjoyed the first one, but I can't really blame the BBFC. I think they do a pretty good job like KoS said.

  • Mercatoria #36 5 years ago

    Is it still possible to import the game from other European countires if they have an English language version?
    Edited by Mercatoria at 19/06/07 @ 12:55

  • absolutezero #37 5 years ago

    hmmmm so itll be released in the rest of Europe?

    and judging from the rest of Rockstars Euro releases they stay in English, as basically the American versions.

    Soooo Ill just buy one from France.

  • SIDEARM #38 5 years ago

    I cant believe so many of you people are happy that you are being treated with such contempt by the state. You are being told that you are incapable of making an informed decision, that a simple videogame will override your tiny mind and encourage you to violence. Of course the representatives of the state who test these things for you are quite capable of seperating fantasy and reality.

    There is no liberty in a nation where the state can arbitrarily control the activities of its citizens- how they act, what they spend their money on and what information they consume.

  • XdarXideX #39 5 years ago

    Manhunt was crap anyway. Its shock value is what brought it to the attention of all kinds of gamers, not its gameplay. There are much better games with better, darker storylines and visual imagery than Manhunt. It was like the Saw/Hostel equivalent of gaming - all shock, no content.

    I'm glad it got banned already. Rockstar are being lazy and need to make some good games instead of rehashing their franchises over and over. Table Tennis was the best thing that came out of them in recent years. It's almost as if the producers are all 15 years old and haven't gotten over their fascination with crime and violence yet.

    EDIT: Normally I wouldn't be happy with someone making the decisions for me but in this instance I don't feel insulted or condescended. I think games like Manhunt give killers (and consequently the media) excuses for their ill state of mind instead of revealing that games are in fact NOT responsible for the murderous intentions of these lunatics. These hyper violent and otherwise empty games are for what... Freedom of choice? No. Rockstar's bank balance.
    Edited by XdarXideX at 19/06/07 @ 13:03

  • Santino #40 5 years ago

    ah fuck this i was looking forward to playing manhunt 2. if the game is released in US i'll be even more tempted to import a US Wii, at least that way i'll get Super Paper Mario, and MP3, Brawl and Galaxy for sure all this year.

  • RazorObsession #41 5 years ago

    such a shame. i'm an Aussie ex pat. and i knew there was no way i was gonna get to play this game here, but the UK too? Fuck nanny state people this is big fuckin brother!

  • playgen #42 5 years ago

    Problem is parents keep buying their little kids 18 games. Most of them think the age rating is how difficult the game is!

  • homerramone #43 5 years ago

    Unfortunately there are loads of crazy fucks out there, and these same crazy fucks can be swayed even by a video game.

    And Unfortunately there are loads of crazy fucks out there, and these same crazy fucks dont always need to be swayed even by a video game. Just getting out of bed in the morning is enough !


  • Daryoon #44 5 years ago

    "The last game to be banned by the BBFC was Carmageddon in 1997"

    "Typical. The bunch of disconnected old farts known as the BBFC strikes again."

    "The last game to be banned by the BBFC was Carmageddon in 1997"

    I think I'm missing something here?

  • Mushybees #45 5 years ago

    Fookin hell!

    I was expecting dark and twisted but what the hell were rockstar thinking when they made this game? I'm not one to agree with censorship but I can see it must be pretty messed up to be rejected. Maybe it's best it isn't released.

  • kangarootoo #46 5 years ago

    This thread is full of nonsense, so lets do a bit of spring cleaning.

    I met with some BBFC people a while back and got a great insight into what they do. With that in mind let me make some points.

    1. They are not a government body. They aren't "scared of the backlash" of releasing this, as the backlash wouldn't be coming to their door. They have a very complete set of rules that control what they do, so its not a matter of them saying "errrrr.... no". Its really about as objective a process as something like this could be.

    2. They ALWAYS try to make edits rather than ban something. They review hundreds of films and games every year, and on average they ban 1 title a year. ONE, out of all the stuff they rate. If they can suggest edits or reclassifications, they do so. They absolutely do not want to ban stuff if they can help it.

    3. People have this idea that they are the morale police, but they are actually some of the most open minded and rationale people I have met involved in cencorship. They get grumpy letters all the time from people complaining that they let film X or game Y be classified too generously. If this stuff was down to some government body you can bet your life things would be a lot worse.

    4. For whoever suggested this is some kind of pr stunt. You clearly know nothing about the BBFC.

    5. You do NOT HAVE to submit your video game for BBFC approval for it to be sold in the UK. However, if you do submit it, you must abide by the result (this bit I am slightly hazy on, I'm pretty sure that is right but the devil is very much in the details in this case).

  • kangarootoo #47 5 years ago

    In fact, how about people go here and read up.

    http://www.bbfc.co.uk/

  • HyperShadow #48 5 years ago

    To be honest, I'm not surprised at this descision. Especially with the Wii version. With using motion control it probably was a little to close to reality in being one of JT's 'Murder Simulators'. The original had some slight detachment in that it was just pressing buttons, rather than performing the actual motions of a killing.

    Oh well, no big loss.

  • Pastici #49 5 years ago

    When did Thrill Kill get banned? I remember a big whoohaa about that but played it a while ago and is fairly mild compared to games nowadays =/. But if it is the first game to be banned in 10 years I think that itr may have been called for.

  • Lawlost #50 5 years ago

    Not normally a fan of the BBFC in relation to their film classifications but with video games their approach is spot on, glad to see they banned this one.

  • thepicto #51 5 years ago

    Wow. I'm shocked and dissapointed. Banning stuff is bad. M'kay? Seriously, it's up to me whether I want to subject myself to this kind of thing not the BBFC.

    My biggest issue is that this is the first Wii game in six months I wanted to buy. I don't want a load of party and puzzle games, so since Zelda I've had nothing. It's got to the point where I've started buying old gamecube games for something to play on the Wii.

    BBFC=Teh Suck!

  • Cannibal #52 5 years ago

    Wonder if Ireland will have it, they have a different ratings board.

  • jonsaan #53 5 years ago

    I think banning and censoring of games is a bit much BUT having heard the American dudes at 1up's podcast where they were talking about this game. I can really see why it's been banned. They were talking with such enthusiasm about killing people by putting a plastic bad over their head and stuff, it was just....wrong...

    Still I don't suppose it's been banned in the States?

  • MasterGrief #54 5 years ago

    The only people happy about this are Xbots jelous that the game wasn't coming to their console

  • Raya #55 5 years ago

    I live in Spain and as they'll show decapitated heads and dead bodies on the breakfast news, uncut adverts for films like Hostel inbetween kiddie programs I know it will be released here. I'll pass on the language info - and maybe setup an ebay store!

    Personally if I could play it straight without having to rip peoples balls off I might be interested in the game as it is it doesn't appeal at all. Just like I wouldn't sit through a film like Hostel (yawn) These games/films get an 18 certificate (or not) and are prized and appeal to the sub 18 year old crowd
    Edited by Raya at 19/06/07 @ 13:13

  • smoison #56 5 years ago

    Wow, now I REALLY want it!!!

  • Pac-man-ate-my-wife #57 5 years ago

    I'm no fan of censorship, but Rockstar have brought this on themselves by their constant use of shock and violence to sell games.

    Saying that, I think it's slightly hypocritical of the BBFC to ban games like this when, only this week, shite like Hostel 2 is released in cinemas. (To be fair, though, I'm not aware of the full content of Manhunt 2).

  • IAmBatman #58 5 years ago

    > 5. You do NOT HAVE to submit your video game for BBFC approval

    I believe ELSPA can refer a game to the BBFC if they want.

  • PearOfAnguish #59 5 years ago

    Thanks for your valuable input, Grief. Cretin.

    Don't quite understand all the hatred toward Rockstar. The first game was pretty good, and releasing a sequel is hardly milking the franchise. And yeah, they're going for shock value - so what? Movies do it all the time, are games not allowed? It's quite clearly aimed at adults, it's not like they're advertising this on Saturday morning kid's TV.
    Edited by PearOfAnguish at 19/06/07 @ 13:13

  • menage #60 5 years ago

    " The only people happy about this are Xbots jelous that the game wasn't coming to their console
    "

    Always some moron trying to make it a gen wars thing.

    No, because it's a useless piece of shit which will only give videogames a bad name. A industry we all love and cherish otherwise you wouldn't be here.
    Edited by menage at 19/06/07 @ 13:11

  • XdarXideX #61 5 years ago

    kangarootoo - Not that I disagree with the rest of your information but I do believe it it required that you submit a game to the BBFC if it has real video footage in it such as documentaries or film clips... at least that's how it goes for us.

    I'm surprised the Wii version of The Godfather got through even the BBFC... you can strangle someone in that game using the wii remote and nunchuk in an eerily realistic fashion.

  • EDvanDamme #62 5 years ago

    well bad news for free speech, personal choice etc, etc.

    BUT as a trader I love it. My orders have doubled in the last hour !

    Even if the game is complete shit, it will sell well now its banned.

    Ed

  • DDevil #63 5 years ago

    I have respect for the BBFC which they have earned over many years. I understand their processes and the lengths they go to NOT ban anything. So for Manhunt to be refused classification means it must be seriously messed up.

  • Rirekon #64 5 years ago

    Meh

  • MasterGrief #65 5 years ago

    @menage

    Since when to you care about appeasing the likes of Jack Thompson ?

    You must read the Daily Mail...

  • Daymare #66 5 years ago

    So much about democracy, ha?

  • Skeletor #67 5 years ago

    Instant cult classic! Thanks to the censors. Order your copy from the Netherlands or Austria where the game will definitely show up.
    Oh and...I almost forgot. Your friendly neighbourhood pirate has a big grin on his face. Maybe it's time for one of these funky modchips...

  • Arcadiian #68 5 years ago

    it's. just. a. game.

    i'm no more likely to murder someone, than i am to dress as a blue hedgehog and rob a jewellers.

  • O.Z #69 5 years ago

    Hmm, the UK is going soft...

  • Biggles #70 5 years ago

    gotta say I'm with the bbfc, here, in part because I can't see how this game would actually appeal to anyone over the age of 18...

  • absolutezero #71 5 years ago

    So anyone have links to stores in Europe that will be stocking the game?

    Yes/No?

    I got Rule of Rose this way aswell. Really does'nt phase me having to do this kind of stuff, I never buy anything out of the shops anymore anyway.

  • menage #72 5 years ago

    "Since when to you care about appeasing the likes of Jack Thompson ?

    You must read the Daily Mail..."

    So not having some kind of morals must get you very far. What the hell doe Jt has to do with having a honest opnion. Go read it yourself, you seem to like popular hype items.

  • MasterGrief #73 5 years ago

    @menage

    So you get your 'morals' from videongames now ?

    I didn't realise that videogames were meant to teach us this

  • Splog #74 5 years ago

    Well, children, that WAS a close one! For a few years there i was under the sorry delusion that i was an adult capable of distinguishing the real world from computer games, right from wrong, reality from fantasy. Thank the lord the righteous BBFC is here to remind us all that we are actually children, needing to be protected from all the ills of this world.

    Once more we can sleep soundly tonight.

  • ProtoformX #75 5 years ago

    That'll be a kick in the teeth after those huge Manhunt 2 posters they put up at Download. I'm currently undecided about this. One one hand I think as an adult I should be able to choose for myself what material I can access but on the other, for the BBFC to have banned this game outright after they let though other "Ban this sick filth!" games like Grand Theft Auto III it must contain some pretty horrific stuff.

    Of course, this will act as promotionasl material for the game now as many people (Myself included in some small way) will be intrigued to see the game to see just what it was like.

  • EDvanDamme #76 5 years ago

    quote: So anyone have links to stores in Europe that will be stocking the game?

    eBay or your local friendly independent retailer ;)

  • playgen #77 5 years ago

    To those complaining about the BBFC
    This is the only game they have banned for 10 years, that should tell you something.
    And if the BBFC didn't exsist you know some stupid developer wanting publicity would make games like Virtual Rapist 2K8 and Extreme Child Abductor Underground

  • Raya #78 5 years ago

    Get your copy here:

    http://www.game.es/ficha/ficha.aspx?sku=...

  • menage #79 5 years ago

    "
    So you get your 'morals' from videongames now ?

    I didn't realise that videogames were meant to teach us this"

    So if they made a game based on kiddie porn it would be fine by you then. You have to draw a line sowehere. I'm not drawing it, but I think it's okay someone does to a certain extent.

  • Daymare #80 5 years ago

    People, just because some of you might agree with BBFC decision, that doesn't mean all the rest should too, now does it? There's no reasoning here - this kind of censorship is just wrong. Freedom of choice should be sacred. It should have a 18+ sticker on it and that's that.

    Of course you're all welcome to completely disagree with me. Free country and all that;)

  • XdarXideX #81 5 years ago

    I think some people are more impressionable than they think, regardess of their age. Not that I agree this game is going to make someone kill people but I think it would give them an excuse for their behaviour. I only want this game to be banned for reasons the BBFC do not care about - the image of gaming and gamers.

    The official word on why it was banned is because there is no other reward in the game other than stalking and killing people. Like I said before, this is a classic example of lazy game design by producers who think they can just get away with shit games as long as they have shock value. Sure, many others do it but Manhunt is exploitation of media attention and it gives gaming and gamers such as yourselves a bad name. That's the choice you are REALLY making... and you're making it for the rest of us who like good games and don't care about shock value or need to resolve a bloodlust (I got over that when I was a child - why haven't the rest of you self proclaimed adults?).

    Thank god the BBFC have unintentionally done something to stop you from making me look bad. :p

  • asphaltcowboy #82 5 years ago

    Good post Kanga, as I said in the forum thread, and as other people have said, the BBFC is probably the best certification body in the world, protecting the industry and working with developers (or film makers) to ensure they're films get out to market and not banning them. They are lenient, well, not even lenient, I'd call it reasonable, unlike certification in many other countries... If they've banned it, then it must be pretty extreme. Rockstar will just have to go back and make fixes...

  • rosler28 #83 5 years ago

    I didn't like Manhunt, sure wouldn't buy Manhunt 2 but I think the BBFC has just opened a can of worms.

    How can they justify the statement that Manhunt 2 will cause harm to minors and adults? Secondly Manhunt 2 is not the only game to offer unremitting violence to a gamer, last time I looked Call of Duty wasn't a happy go lucky experience, or go back to the 8bit days Green Beret was just the same. in fact the premise of all shooters is: kills lots of people.

    Finally other media offer 'unremitting bleakness and callousness'. Downfall is one of my favourite films yet the subject matter - watch the last days of the nazi high command - was bleak and dark.

  • OrangeGoblin #84 5 years ago

    The Saw films are awful, I made it about 5 minutes through the third one before I just couldn't take enough. Yet Manhunt, which isn't as bad in my opinion, gets banned, and the Saw films are chart toppers. Hmm..
    Edited by OrangeGoblin at 19/06/07 @ 13:47

  • XdarXideX #85 5 years ago

    Rosler28 - Except that's heavily based on a historic event we're all well aware of and in fact taught about in school. There's an acception.

  • DiscoMike #86 5 years ago

    Thrill Kill wasnt "banned" as such. It was canned. I think it was in development by Westwood under Virgin. Then EA bought Westwood and the game was shelved.

  • PearOfAnguish #87 5 years ago

    get away with shit games as long as they have shock value.

    How do you know it's shit?
    What's wrong with shock value?

  • remote #88 5 years ago

    I wasn't looking forward to manhunt 2 really, i thought the 1st was pretty dull. I am against all out bans on stuff though. Let grown ups decide for themselves based on the information available. It's our choice whether to expose ourselves to this potentially damaging experience, I'm happy to take the consequences.

    I think they should ban people from signing up to the armed forces, as I'm sure a couple of years of that will do more damage than a few hours on a videogame.

  • Santino #89 5 years ago

    OrangeGoblin makes a very good point regarding the Saw movies. They probably make it through the BBFC without so much as a blink but they are generally aimed at nothing more than providing gruesome deaths. ah what the hell i'm just a bit bitter as i was looking forward to this. i'm sure there will be some way to get a hold of a copy from somewhere though....

  • MrBiggles #90 5 years ago

    But Mommy I want to saw a mans head off with the Wiimote WAAA WAAA!!!

    grow up manbabies, it's pathetic to see you cry about a silly little game. They done there job banning this game, get over it.
    Edited by MrBiggles at 19/06/07 @ 13:53

  • Arcadiian #91 5 years ago

    you do have to draw the line somewhere, but then i wonder why it's alright for me to shoot a human in a game, or drive over them with a tank, but not do whatever Manhunt 2 had planned.

    BBFC: Manhunt 2 is distinguishable from recent high-end video games by its unremitting bleakness and callousness of tone in an overall game context which constantly encourages visceral killing with exceptionally little alleviation or distancing.

    right, so it's alright to murder people if i'm listening to Lips 106 in an 80s setting, but not alright for me to do it in a dark polygonal alley ?

  • PearOfAnguish #92 5 years ago

    The difference with Saw and other movies, though, is that you're spectating not participating.

  • MasterGrief #93 5 years ago

    'So if they made a game based on kiddie porn it would be fine by you then. You have to draw a line sowehere. I'm not drawing it, but I think it's okay someone does to a certain extent. '

    @ Menage

    Well surely a kiddie porn game would involve harming a child. As far as I know no humans were harmed in the making of this game.

    Besides what determines a game being too violent is all subjective. At the end of the day killing is killing which 90% of videogames contain so what does it matter how it's done. Even if it's sadistic , then why are films like Saw 1 , 2 and 3 still being shown ?

  • chicknstu #94 5 years ago

    Ironically, this makes me want to kill people more than any videogame ever did,

  • mkreku #95 5 years ago

    Hmm, I distinctly remember chainsawing people to death in a gruesome display of blood and guts.. I think the game was some unknown entity called Gears of War or some such. How did that fare with the BBFC?

  • dcangel #96 5 years ago

    It's worth noting that when it comes to classification decisions like this, the context in which violence is presented plays a big part. Comparing Manhunt 2 to, say, Call of Duty is problematic because the former presents violence as an end in itself - whereas in the latter, the violence is in the context of war, so it is somewhat justifiable.

    The first game, amoral though it was, presented the main character as a forced participant in a kill-or-be-killed situation, and the game as a whole raised some interesting questions about the increasing prevalence of (and our desensitisation to) violent themes in mainstream entertainment, which may explain how it was classified despite the unremitting violent content. If Manhunt 2 has been refused a classification, there must not be even that little pinch of artistic value.

  • MrBiggles #97 5 years ago

    Freedom of media is a right, but not an absolute one, its an important distinction, otherwise we would see sex, violence and profanity during daytime TV, "adult" music on mainstream radio etc, society usually can self censor, but there are times when outside, higher enforcement is needed, this is one of those times.

  • Pastici #98 5 years ago

    @DiscoMike

    Ah thanks for that. So was it just canned outright or "Internally Banned" or something like that?

  • PearOfAnguish #99 5 years ago

    where is the evidence that this is more damaging?

    No idea, probably isn't any and I didn't claim it was more damaging anyway. I wasn't saying they were right or wrong, but it's not hard to understand that maybe that's one reason why the BBFC are slightly more lenient on violent movies.

    I think the game was some unknown entity called Gears of War or some such. How did that fare with the BBFC?

    Like dcangel says, it's the context. Chainsawing aliens in a war is different to suffocating someone down an alley.
    Edited by PearOfAnguish at 19/06/07 @ 14:09

  • kangarootoo #100 5 years ago

    Those making comparisons to the SAW films don't quite understand the basis on which ratings are given. Physical violence, gore, etc, alone will not get your game or film banned. FACT.

    Its all about context. SAW 3 was pretty grusome in places, but the violence was always depicted as horrific. Also, the films had all sorts of characters, messages and so on, so balance was present throughout.

    If you read the article you see,

    "Manhunt 2 is distinguishable from recent high-end video games by its unremitting bleakness and callousness of tone in an overall game context which constantly encourages visceral killing with exceptionally little alleviation or distancing.

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

    THAT is why it was banned. The BBFC felt that the context was severaly unbalanced throughout the title. it wasn't to do with the amount of blood onscreen.

    How about people read the BBFC link I posted. It will save us all a lot of time and energy in the long run.

  • Daymare #101 5 years ago

    "Freedom of media is a right, but not an absolute one, its an important distinction, otherwise we would see sex, violence and profanity during daytime TV, "adult" music on mainstream radio etc, society usually can self censor, but there are times when outside, higher enforcement is needed, this is one of those times."

    @MrBiggles

    Ah, yes, I agree, but this isn't daytime TV or mainstream radio, where you - or better yet, your kids - can accidently run into something inappropriate. This is a mature game that should be age-restricted, not banned. It's not kiddie porn either, nor can you measure it's influence on peoples' tendencies towards violence. So, no, in my opinion, this is Not "one of those times".
    Edited by Daymare at 19/06/07 @ 14:13

  • menage #102 5 years ago

    "Besides what determines a game being too violent is all subjective. At the end of the day killing is killing which 90% of videogames contain so what does it matter how it's done. Even if it's sadistic , then why are films like Saw 1 , 2 and 3 still being shown ?"

    I asked the exact same question in my first post.

    "It's worth noting that when it comes to classification decisions like this, the context in which violence is presented plays a big part. Comparing Manhunt 2 to, say, Call of Duty is problematic because the former presents violence as an end in itself - whereas in the latter, the violence is in the context of war, so it is somewhat justifiable. "

    Exactly, it's all about context. Not just killing for killing sake. In CoD you fight against a nation which killed 6 million Jews. And youshoot them, like people do in war. I'm not against MH2 as a game (I don't need it, but who am I to say someone can't play it), I'm agaisnt games that glorify violence for the sake of gloryfing violence.

    "Hmm, I distinctly remember chainsawing people to death in a gruesome display of blood and guts.. I think the game was some unknown entity called Gears of War or some such. How did that fare with the BBFC?""

    Weren't those aliens/bugs?:

  • kiroquai #103 5 years ago

    *shrugs* on a personal level I'm not too bothered - I thought the original Manhunt was really quite dull after a while.

    Interested to see that one of the criteria for the game not being passed was how bleak it was. I just played a rather epic game of Defcon this lunchtime and found it more bleak than I ever found Manhunt. Heck, I even cheered when I managed to nuke Cairo repeatedly and wipe out over 20 million people.

    That disturbs me more than watching some guy put a bag over someone's head. Then again, as said, the BBFC are very open-minded folks and if they are this concerned about something then it's got to be pretty grim going.

  • Nithron #104 5 years ago

    Okay, all the people saying "I understand why this was banned"... You what?
    I'm an adult. *I* decide what i want to do, and if it isn't hurting anyone else, what gives the BBFC the right to tell me otherwise?
    At what point, exactly, did i hand over to *them*, the responsibility to decide what I can and cannot handle?

    There is no evidence whatsoever that violent videogames cause people to commit violent crimes. Once again, we have a regulatory body that is taking action based on nothing whatsoever, except a set of rules that they just completely made up without consulting any factual information at all.

    Brilliant.

  • DUFFKING #105 5 years ago

    Serves them right, maybe now they'll take notice of the situation the gaming industry is in with enough pressure at the moment and stop being press baiting twats.

  • DUFFKING #106 5 years ago

    Serves them right, maybe now they'll take notice of the situation the gaming industry is in with enough pressure at the moment and stop being press baiting twats.

  • Daymare #107 5 years ago

    Yeah, DUFFKING, let's have censors in every single game development team, excluding what is unsuitable for Jack Thompsons of the world before they even put it in the game...

  • Les #108 5 years ago

    IMHO there's few good reasons for banning something. 'Mature' ratings, etc. are fine. Some content isn't meant for kids and if parents can't/won't control this, industry/government might take the responsibility. But for grown-ups, let them decide for themselves whether it's suitable for them or not.

  • pantbash #109 5 years ago

    Just makes me want to go out and buy Manhunt 2 from somewhere..


    I could not have given a flying whatever about it untill it got banned.
    Go figure...

  • wizbob #110 5 years ago

    I have more of a problem with exploitation flicks like Hostel than I do with games like Manhunt. The first Manhunt was psychotic and a bit amoral but it didn't quietly present racism and misogyny to a huge mainstream audience in the hope of making giant piles of cash as Hostel did.

    I resent how calculated Hostel & SAW are. I'm sure Eli Roth isn't even doing it for fun - he's not cackling like Ed Wood when he watches an actress being mutilated in the dailies, more likely he's coldly estimating the viewership slice and whether adding the scene will help maximise profits.

    I wouldn't like to censor stuff like this; better to remove the profit motive from those creeps - why not just tax the bleeding entrails out of these kind of titles? Auteurs and freaks are generally not only satisfied with breaking even, they are even will to take continuous losses but it will deter the really evil bloodsuckers like Warner Brothers or Take Two.
    Edited by wizbob at 26/06/07 @ 22:12

  • hamstand #111 5 years ago

    christ on a bike. what a complete waste of time.

  • BobasaurasRex #112 5 years ago

    Is this coming out in Ireland? I hope it is! :D

  • dom6918 #113 5 years ago

    Erm...how can they ban this? Did they not pass Postal 2 with no cuts?
    That game celebrated the decapitation of innocent people with points and allowed you to piss on people??

  • dcangel #114 5 years ago

    "There is no evidence whatsoever that violent videogames cause people to commit violent crimes. "

    True. However, there is no evidence to the contrary either. Seeing as we have no definitive proof one way or the other, it seems sensible to err on the side of caution in difficult cases like this one.

    One issue with violence in videogames is one that to my knowledge (correct me if I'm wrong) hasn't really been touched on a great deal - in most cases, the player is actively participating in violence (at least by proxy) without any thought as to what its consequences might be. When a person plays a violent video game, the enemies that he destroys are essentially glorified targets, but what if there were more to it? What if games actually showed you the broader societal consequences of the violence you're dishing out, like the reactions of the families and friends of the deceased? Would it make you think twice about your actions?

  • TR421 #115 5 years ago

    Just a technicallity here, it hasn't been banned it's just not legal to sell if refused a certificate from the BBFC.
    Frankly Rockstar rest too much on their shock factor laurels anyway.
    Excepting table tennis maybe.

  • OrangeGoblin #116 5 years ago

    You've got to wonder how they rate these games as well. Do they employer a gamer to play it to the end and show the video to the people rating it, or is it just some old dude staring at a Wiimote who decides "no, lets ban it"?

  • sanctusmortis #117 5 years ago

    For the film comparison: Hostel and their ilk are often edited to avoid directly showing the violence and leaving it to suggestion, such as showing their feet instead with blood pooling around them. This game doesn't do that, and neither did the original. The first scraped it as their was a reason and another way; this game was ultraviolence, and as such is in current form unable for release, in the same way many films usually are.

    For the people bagging on the BBFC: they're an independent body, and are very reasonable about this sort of thing. An outright ban suggests the game went too far and needs some editing.

    For the people wah-ing about a nanny state: it made it to the BBFC, which in some countries it wouldn't manage.

  • CallousB #118 5 years ago

    "Is this coming out in Ireland"

    Nope.

    ifco have just announced a ban in Ireland as well.:(

  • Draqule #119 5 years ago

    Just out of interest, has a member of the BBFC ever been tried for murder ?

    /backontopic

    To be fair while I'd love to believe that Rockstar have created a game that wants to explore the nature of violence and reality in the modern world and are merely being punished for pulling back the curtain further than is comfortable, I think that they've been courting this kind of controversy and the BBFC have probably made the right call.
    However, I still think censorship in any form is dangerous ground.

  • CrawlingKingSnakes #120 5 years ago

    Jeffrey Dahmer, the famous American serial killer, derived sexual gratification from watching the scene in 'The Return of the Jedi' when the Emperor electrocutes Luke. He also enjoyed the copius violence of the Old Testament.



  • FunkyRenegade #121 5 years ago

    Buy it from somewhere else in europe :)
    I know I definately want a copy, if not just to see why it's been banned.
    Shows how effective banning is...

  • MrBiggles #122 5 years ago

    Banned in Ireland now with Germany and Australia to follow.

    I predict a worldwide ban or Nintendo to remove there seal of approval on this game.

  • kangarootoo #123 5 years ago

    What so many on here fail to grasp is that the BBFC is by the people for the people.

    It represents the majority desire of the populace (their rules are constantly updated as a result of public input).

    Funnily enough that is exactly what a democracy is about. I.e. representing the wishes of the majority whilst also protecting the right of the minority.

    Now some may feel their rights have been impinged by this, but the fact of life is you will never find a situation where everyone is served. There will always be a situation where maintaining the rights of one individual unavoidably impinges the rights of another individual. Thats just how it is.

    The BBFC is by one of the best classification boards out there, we have it lucky believe me. Now on the one hand people can just accept the whole bloody universe doesn't revolve around them and that they won't always get their own way (whether that is fair not not), or they can whine on about a game that was probably going to be bobbins anyway.

    If you want absolute and total freedom, go live on a f*cking desert island. If you want to live in "society", accept that sometimes your "rights" will be affected in the name of upholding the rights of others.

  • HelloWorld #124 5 years ago

    Awesome. Where can i get the game from?

  • secombe #125 5 years ago

    You've got to wonder how they rate these games as well. Do they employer a gamer to play it to the end and show the video to the people rating it, or is it just some old dude staring at a Wiimote who decides "no, lets ban it"?

    I love how people spend the time slagging off a decision without bothering to spend 1 minute actually researching the facts.

    BBFC Video Game Guidelines

    I've been reading about the BBFC for about 10 years, it's great when a decision comes along and people start spewing rubbish out like they know what is best for this entire country. Just be grateful we have probably the best certification system in the world, one solid enough to keep many of the problems seen around the world at bay.

    Go and have a good read about the MPAA then tell me it's all going down the pan here.

  • SBfistfun #126 5 years ago

    @kangarootoo

    Amen to that, you hit the nail on the head

  • HelloWorld #127 5 years ago

    What kangerootoo says is broadly correct, but not really applicable to this. What games an adult plays in the comfort of their own home (presumably this game would be 18 cert at least) is no one's business but their own.

  • rosler28 #128 5 years ago

    Kangarootoo what right is someone upholding by banning Manhunt 2?

    I may be a pacifist or I may be general supporter of the third reich meaning Call of Duty offends me - does that give the BBFC a justification in banning WW2 games?

    I agree with the sentiment that the BBFC is a good regulator I just think they've got this wrong and sets a dangerous precedent.

  • zuljin #129 5 years ago

    @HelloWorld
    "What kangerootoo says is broadly correct, but not really applicable to this. What games an adult plays in the comfort of their own home (presumably this game would be 18 cert at least) is no one's business but their own."

    Considering the governent is considering (or have they?) banning simulated S&M pornography, I think you'll find that in some sense, the government do have some control over what you do in your own home.

    I'm gonna quote Kanga agin since he put it so eloquently:
    " If you want to live in "society", accept that sometimes your "rights" will be affected in the name of upholding the rights of others. "

  • playgen #130 5 years ago

    Ahhh people moaning about censorship!
    If you want the game you'll still be able to buy it somewhere, so stop moaning.

    Fact is that kids play games they shouldn't, its not ideal, but its the parents fault mainly. With this knowledge in mind, of course BBFC have to restrict certain content, and by the sounds of it this game really goes to far, remembering that the last game banned was 10 years ago, and the ban was lifted on it.
    Having it kept out of shops kids can buy it from in this country is perfectly rerasonable, the same reasons why woolworths don't stock hardcore pronography - you don't want to be exposed to it constantly, and people can still get it if they want.

  • President_Weasel #131 5 years ago

    There still seems to be some confusion as to the law in this country concerning games and the BBFC.
    Games are exempt from the censorship laws in this country. However they lose this exemption if they have certain content such as excessive violence and sexual violence. Once a game has lost exemption it legally MUST be referred to the BBFC and get a certificate before it can legally be sold in the UK. There is no element of choice.

    Games that get a 16 or higher from PEGI get referred to the Video Standards Council. They decide if the game has lost exemption and must be referred to the BBFC.


    Incidentally, the BBFC are great. I deal with them occasionally and they are a great bunch of guys, very level-headed and dedicated. As several other people have mentioned they are easily the best statutory rating agency out there. I am saddened to see so many ill-informed comments in this thread about them.

    They won't have banned this for political reasons, they won't have banned it because they were scared of the backlash, they won't have banned it because of the (stupid) Stefan Pakeerah controversy. They will have banned it because it blatantly controvenes their guidelines - which by the way are available to the publisher.

    In fact, if I remember rightly, the BBFC will let you submit your game for a reference viewing during production. Rockstar could and should have shown the game to them and talked about it with them before they got this far and spent so much money on a game that frankly only an idiot would think could get past the BBFC uncut.
    Seriously, Rockstar are either trying to manufacture controversy here or whoever they have in charge of age ratings over there is deeply incompetent.

    (Either that or he or she is now sitting there going "see? I bloody TOLD you, you idiots!" next time, listen to me.)
    Edited by President_Weasel at 19/06/07 @ 15:48

  • Subquest #132 5 years ago

    kangarootoo, whilst I agree with your sentiments I think the issue here is the BBFC doesn't trust the public to protect their children from exposure to this game. Somebody posted before about adults buying violent games for their kids without a second thought, and I've seen as much myself.

    The BBFC knows a game like this is going to be played by kids and have taken their decision accordingly. The fact there is too many lazy, ignorant adults out there who don't care what their kids are playing has caused this ban.

  • Fudce #133 5 years ago

    For the BBFC to have refused the game classification, it must have been nothing but mindless killing, with no real reason behind the killing other than for the pleasure it brings. Other games that have portrayed killing in a similar light have at least had consequenses connected to the act.
    Grand Theft Auto 3, for instance. No one will argue that that game portrays killing in quite a tasteless fashion, however if you do kill somebody, you get the police chasing after you.

    I don't know much about Manhunt 2, but I do know that the BBFC wouldn't have refused the game classification without a very good reason to do so. They have also looked at places in the game where Rockstar could have made changes, in order to get the game a classification, but they couldn't find any.

    People who want the game, can still buy it, just not from a UK retailer.

  • kangarootoo #134 5 years ago

    @HelloWorld and rosler28

    In this case the right being upheld are those of people who DO believe that exposure to certain media will affect your behaviour.

    Now you may not agree with them, for the most part I don't myself, but that is not relevent when it comes to the principles of upholding rights in a democracy.

    To start ignoring the right of others, just because you don't agree, is facism. Not suggesting for a second either of you are facists btw :) Just trying to demonstrate where things can lead when we start being selective about whose rights we protect.

    Someone I'm sure can dig out that classic quote, something along the lines of "I don't agree, but will fight to the death for your right to spout nonsense" (of course, I paraphrase).

  • kangarootoo #135 5 years ago

    @Subquest

    "I think the issue here is the BBFC doesn't trust the public to protect their children from exposure to this game."

    Seriously, the BBFC do not represent themselves. ALL of their rules have been formed as a result of public consultation and they continually update them as a result of the same.

    The BBFC don't even have an opinion on whether games affect kids (individuals may, but not the body itself, and we have to trust that the staff are professional in their conduct), in fact they don't need an opinion and it isn't their job to have one.

    The BBFC follows rules that are, in part, formed by members of the public that DO believe games can affect kids (too continue the shorthand). If we the public stop thinking that, the BBFC rules will change to reflect that.

    So its not really the BBFC that some of us here disagree with, it is US (to use the royal version) that they disagree with, as it is US that set the rules by which the BBFC MUST abide.

  • SBfistfun #136 5 years ago

    "is no one's business but their own"

    Wrong, you're not free, I'm not free, nobody is free.

    You live in a society, therefore you live by it's rules. If, not, you better go find a jungle or desert Island somewhere to live on.
    That's the way it is.

  • Subquest #137 5 years ago

    @Kangarootoo

    Well then WE don't trust ourselves to not let kids play 18 certificate games - which I think is true, but is that enough to ban them? If it is, then surely we should be banning a lot more games if we know kids will be playing them.

    Banning is a dangerous precedent to set imo.

  • HelloWorld #138 5 years ago

    posted by zulin:
    "
    Considering the governent is considering (or have they?) banning simulated S&M pornography, I think you'll find that in some sense, the government do have some control over what you do in your own home.

    I'm gonna quote Kanga agin since he put it so eloquently:
    " If you want to live in "society", accept that sometimes your "rights" will be affected in the name of upholding the rights of others. "
    "

    I heard about the porn thing. That's ridiculous too. I understand how anarchy is a bad thing, and that laws against, say, murder and rape are pretty smart ideas for society, even though there are some people who want to go out and do these things. However, i believe in allowing people to watch S&M or do all kinds of nasty things in computer games. I also agree with the quote kangeroo is talking about.
    Of course it's a grey area, otherwise people wouldn't argue about it, and it is arguable that doing these things makes it more likely that people will commit real crimes (like murdering people). It's also arguable that they make it less likely.

    kangeroo:
    Isn't facism a totalitarian social policy- where you strictly censor what people say and do? Surely this kind of censorship is a step towards this. I think a law based on simple postulates like "do unto others as you would do unto yourself", and "if it doesn't affect posulate 1, do whatever you want to", or something, is a better way to go than "ban whatever some people who are probably a bit prudish or religious or stupid have an inkling that other people shouldn't be doing even though they've never done it themselves".

    "
    To start ignoring the right of others, just because you don't agree, is facism. Not suggesting for a second either of you are facists btw :) Just trying to demonstrate where things can lead when we start being selective about whose rights we protect.
    "
    This works from the liberal side of the argument too. :)

  • zuljin #139 5 years ago

    @HelloWorld
    Worst was a few years back, a few gay guys were having a "house party", and were arrested for having consensual S&M related sex.

    But yes very grey area. TBH I can't actually decide whether I'm with the BBFC or against it on this one, but more than likely Rockstar is gonna get my money because I would like to find out.

  • HelloWorld #140 5 years ago

    SBfistfun:
    "
    Wrong, you're not free, I'm not free, nobody is free.

    You live in a society, therefore you live by it's rules. If, not, you better go find a jungle or desert Island somewhere to live on.
    That's the way it is.
    "

    Obviously if you're making bombs in the comfort of your own home, then the state should take an interest in this. At the moment, the state also can tell you off for watching the wrong kind of videos or computer games or whatever.

    I agree that society is a good idea. However, to blindly accept the current rules of society and not look at how they could be better is a bit silly. People probably gave the "put up or shut up, (and go live on a desert island)" argument to the suffragettes, Gandhi, MLK etc. It's perfectly feasible that we could live in a society where you can't go around killing people, but can watch whatever smut you like and hammer people's faces in on your playstation.

  • HelloWorld #141 5 years ago

    zuljin:
    "
    @HelloWorld
    Worst was a few years back, a few gay guys were having a "house party", and were arrested for having consensual S&M related sex.

    But yes very grey area. TBH I can't actually decide whether I'm with the BBFC or against it on this one, but more than likely Rockstar is gonna get my money because I would like to find out.
    "

    I think i heard about that. I don't care what the gays get up to in their own homes. It's their business, as long as no one drowns in a pool.

    I bought the original Manhunt when Dixons withdrew it from sale after some kid hammered his mate to death. Still haven't played it though. I'm afraid it will scare me.

  • Kami #142 5 years ago

    I think you forget that Rockstar and Take2 DO have the right of appeal and if they make changes, it may get classified.

    But as it is, I am not in the least bit surprised it got banned. Manhunt itself was pushing it a tad. There is only so far you can push the limits of taste and decency before the ratings boards snap.

    This isn't about moral police, PC Brigade or anything like that. It's about what is in the boundries of taste and decency and whether it works and is justifiable in its context. All ratings boards are the same. I don't believe in banning stuff but on the same token, I do understand and appreciate that it is, at times, a necessity.

  • zooms #143 5 years ago

    Thanks feck. Anything that sets out with the main intention of shocking deserves everything it gets.

  • SBfistfun #144 5 years ago

    "Worst was a few years back, a few gay guys were having a "house party", and were arrested for having consensual S&M related sex."

    Whats wrong with that?

    /runs

  • zuljin #145 5 years ago

    /Waits in SBfistfuns house to show him what hes missing...

  • bladeaku #146 5 years ago

    What a bunch of pussies the uk is,this game is no worse than something like hostel and the bbfc is a bunch of corporate twats.
    Free speech is a thing of the past and if they think playing violent games will turn people into killers then the bbfc is sadly mistaken.
    If someone cant tell the difference between real life and a game, then that is their problem why should everyone else lose out.
    How is this game anymore sick than something like hostel tell me that?.
    Edited by bladeaku at 19/06/07 @ 16:53

  • GiarcYekrub #147 5 years ago

    Ireland has banned it too

  • GiarcYekrub #148 5 years ago

    I wonder if GTA IV will be banned too

  • afghan_jones #149 5 years ago

    @bladeaku & others

    How can you possibly say it is no worse than hostel when you haven't played Manhunt2?

  • Chim_chimma_nee! #150 5 years ago

    Although I'm not really interested in this title, I decide what is suitable for me, not anyone else. How do they know what is suitable anyway? in 20 years time we will look back and laugh at this getting banned.

    I have already imagined far weirder and twisted stuff than what's in this game anyway. Innocence in the 21st century is long dead.


  • bladeaku #151 5 years ago

    @bladeaku & others

    How can you possibly say it is no worse than hostel when you haven't played Manhunt2?

    Well for a start hostel had real actors in it, and manhunt has graphics no matter how violent it looks its still only a game.
    Have you played defcon on the pc?, you nuke entire countrys with millions dead and that game doesnt even have a rating on it.
    Films are getting more and more graphic, and yet they are ok but games which look nowhere near as realistic get banned its pathetic.

  • zuljin #152 5 years ago

    @afghan_jones
    "How can you possibly say it is no worse than hostel when you haven't played Manhunt2?"

    I can say for FACT that it is worse, for the simple reasons that Hostel was such a fake/obviously fake film. I was laughing at pretty much most of it.

    /Seeks help

  • kangarootoo #153 5 years ago

    @Subquest

    "Banning is a dangerous precedent to set imo."

    Which is why the BBFC avoid doing it in all but the most rare occasions. 10 years since the last game was banned (as has been mentioned) and an average of only one ban a year across all media under their control.


    @HelloWorld

    "Isn't facism a totalitarian social policy- where you strictly censor what people say and do?"

    For sure. This is where things become complex. We have a situation where to censor what one person does (buy a game) is to avoid censoring what someone else does (take steps to create what they believe is a safe society).

    None of this is objective really. It all goes back to the point I made earlier about never being able to please everyone. Someone who calls for a complete ban on censorship, without hearing the arguments of those who support it, is no better than someone who calls for totalitarian censorship of violent video games. The person I respect most is the one that accepts we can never please everyone all of the time and so looks for the best fit compromise.

  • kangarootoo #154 5 years ago

    @HelloWorld

    "People probably gave the "put up or shut up, (and go live on a desert island)" argument to the suffragettes"

    I never suggested that accepting reality is the same as putting up and shutting up. There is a difference between striving for something you believe in, and getting all worked up over the absence of an untenable fantasy.


    As for the comparisons to Hostel, I refer to my previous comments about the comparisons made to the SAW films. It is CONTEXT that is important here. The violence in Hostel was always portrayed as horrific and injust. Manhunt 1 (as the best reference I can find, having not played the sequel) glorified the violence.

    And the BBFC have said that the balance of context was absent in this case. The balance of context was not missing from Hostel.

    Why am I repeating myself? :)

  • bladeaku #155 5 years ago

    "Isn't facism a totalitarian social policy- where you strictly censor what people say and do?"

    This is how facism starts, incrimentally you restrict more and more until they have total control of what people can see and do and say.
    Its proof that you live in a dictatorship, where a governing bodie decides what people should and shouldt see and do.
    Edited by bladeaku at 19/06/07 @ 17:16

  • Hugundo #156 5 years ago

    Phew, that was close.
    I wouldn't want to kill somebody now would i!

  • kangarootoo #157 5 years ago

    I think one key aspect of fighting facism is to create a structure that accounts for the fact that you yourself might be wrong. Otherwise, despite the best of intentions, the will of "one" is being forced on others.

  • EmiliasHorse #158 5 years ago

    I think the Wii mote could make this a very nasty title indeed. It's one thing pressing a button or moving a stick to murder, but doing the action on the Wii is sick.

    I vote for Sexy Beach 3 on Wii.

  • Les #159 5 years ago

    I really don’t care whether the BBFC is a democratic body or not. I’m not too knowledgeable on UK law, but most Continental countries have a constitution, which protects universal human rights (free speech, freedom of religion, equality, etc.). Games in many cases (can vary from country to country) will fall under the freedom of speech. So unless the game breaches one of the other universal human rights, imbedded in the constitution, it can’t be banned by any body as that would mean it will disregard the right of free speech.

    I don’t have the impression Manhunt 2 is racist, homophobic, constrains ones right to choose and practice a religion, etc. and therefore it shouldn’t be banned.
    Edited by Les at 19/06/07 @ 18:02

  • king_skins #160 5 years ago

    I love the fact that people are giving opinions on a game that haven't played and know relatively little about, classic.

    Also loving the comments about it upto me what I watch and nothing should be banned.

    Well done kangarootoo for being the the main sensible person in the thread.

  • smelly #161 5 years ago

    "I love the fact that people are giving opinions on a game that haven't played"


    ... and now arent allowed to.

  • bladeaku #162 5 years ago

    heres rockstars say on it.

    We are disappointed with the recent decision by the British Board of Film Classification to refuse classification of Manhunt 2. While we respect the authority of the classification board and will abide by the rules, we emphatically disagree with this particular decision.

    "Manhunt 2 is an entertainment experience for fans of psychological thrillers and horror. The subject matter of this game is in line with other mainstream entertainment choices for adult consumers.

    "We respect those who have different opinions about the horror genre and video games as a whole, but we hope they will also consider the opinions of the adult gamers for whom this product is intended. We believe all products should be rated to allow the public to make informed choices about the media and art they wish to consume. The stories in modern video games are as diverse as the stories in books, film and television. The adult consumers who would play this game fully understand that it is fictional interactive entertainment and nothing more."



    NGamer says:

    "The astonishing level of brutality is an integral part of the experience..."

    "[Manhunt combines] the tense stealth elements of Splinter Cell with the crowd-pleasing fatalities of Mortal Kombat, wrapped up in a story that's a little bit of Second Sight, a little bit of Hostel and a whole lot of unsettling..."

    "Manhunt 2 is a unique treat for adult gamers with strong stomachs..."

    "We've deliberately avoided talking about the game's more grisly excesses because these things are best discovered for yourself..."

    "Once [an execution] is over, you can drag the remains - at least, the bits you can clear up without a shovel and mop - into the shadows..."








    The controls
    NGamer says:

    "The motion controls put you in Daniel's shoes in a way that simply holding a releasing a button cannot..."

    "Each execution has several stages, activated by a chopping motion, or a prod, or a slam to the floor, or a sawing movement..."

    "Executions are much more physical with the Wii controls, and we found we felt more immersed in the game world thanks to them..."

    The locations
    NGamer says:

    "The journey to the Project's labs takes in some truly rancid locations..."

    "... a torture dungeon beneath a fetishists' nightclub and a porn theatre in which you fight while an adult movie plays on the big screen..."

    The impact
    NGamer says:

    "A lot of people are going to be offended by it, for its copious violence and occasional sex scene..."

    "Somebody, somewhere is going to get a shock when they walk in on a friend laterally bisecting a hunter's head with realistic sawing motions..."

    "Manhunt 2 is what Wii's parental controls are for..."

    "In its own bloody way, it's an example of the '30 seconds of fun' gaming ethos popularised by Bungie's Halo, slowed down and stretched out into stealth and horror..."

    Edited by bladeaku at 19/06/07 @ 18:10

  • Les #163 5 years ago

    smelly +1

  • Errol #164 5 years ago

    Won't people just import it from abroad?

  • Kyle #165 5 years ago

    At the end of the day adults should have the choice. I understand something like the BBFC is neccesary, but to outright ban something thats obviously not suitable for anyone below the age of 18 anyway is somewhat insulting, like they're saying its so bad that we can't handle it or something.

    And to all those harping on about it being too real because of the motion control its still not very realistic to wave a wiimote about your living room compared to stabbing someone in real life. As Simon Byron on One Life Left pointed out: "What are they gonna do next? Ban sticks 'cos kids can use them as swords?"

    "Although the difference should not be exaggerated the fact of the game's unrelenting focus on stalking and brutal slaying and the sheer lack of alternative pleasures -"

    STOP! Lack of alternative pleasures? Why does it need any? Thats the type of game it is, a horror/thriller!

    "Against this background, the Board's carefully considered view is that to issue a certificate to Manhunt 2, on either platform, would involve a range of unjustifiable harm risks, to both adults and minors -"

    WHAT? MINORS? It's clearly not a childrens game so I don't see why that's a factor.

    /rant
    Edited by Kyle at 19/06/07 @ 19:49

  • Daymare #166 5 years ago

    "Funnily enough that is exactly what a democracy is about. I.e. representing the wishes of the majority whilst also protecting the right of the minority.

    Now some may feel their rights have been impinged by this, but the fact of life is you will never find a situation where everyone is served. There will always be a situation where maintaining the rights of one individual unavoidably impinges the rights of another individual. Thats just how it is.

    The BBFC is by one of the best classification boards out there, we have it lucky believe me. Now on the one hand people can just accept the whole bloody universe doesn't revolve around them and that they won't always get their own way (whether that is fair not not), or they can whine on about a game that was probably going to be bobbins anyway.

    If you want absolute and total freedom, go live on a f*cking desert island. If you want to live in "society", accept that sometimes your "rights" will be affected in the name of upholding the rights of others."


    kangarootoo,

    the problematic part of your reasoning is that, in this case, just because you agree with BBFC decision, you (of course) think it is the Right decision. But it's not about the game, it's not about it's content, it's about freedom of choice, one of the most important aspects of human beings. And, yes, living in a society means you have to throw away some of your right and in return gain other benefits and rights, but this is also not about that subject. We're not asking for a right to kill some other human being or in any way step on their rights. Me or somebody else wanting to buy a friggin' game has nothing to do with you (who does acctualy think the universe is evolving around him/her here, I wonder?)! Anybody (adult enough) should have ALL the rights to buy Manhunt 2 if they want to, they're not hurting anybody with their decision. Your (BBFC's) opinion where to draw the line is irelevant and only that, an opinion. Mindlesly submiting to the wishes of majority is always dangerous, for any state. Who are You to regulate? Why would You (BBFC) be the shepherd and other people be the sheep?

    Thankfully I live in the country where I can choose myself. And no, we don't have a bunch of serial killers running around just because people watch what they wonna watch and play what they choose to play.
    Edited by Daymare at 19/06/07 @ 21:30

  • Nithron #167 5 years ago

    Daymare has it exactly right.
    If you want to talk about the rights of the individual, banning this game violates the public's rights for freedom of choice and freedom of expression, while selling the game violates... What, exactly? Whose rights would be violated by this game being on the shelves? The people who are "taking steps to create what they believe is a safe society", as kangarootoo put it?
    So why is their apparent "right" to impose their idea of a safe society, which is based on no factual evidence whatsoever, on us, more important than our right to freedom of choice?

    Yeah, and we all live in a society which has rules etc. But when these rules have no discernable benefit for the general populace, but are restricting the actions of a few, are they not pretty much useless?

  • Kyle #168 5 years ago

    A lot of people are dissmissing this news on the basis that "it would probably be shit anyway". For me that's not the point. It may well be shit but the fact is I no longer have the opportunity to find that out for myself.

    I really am having trouble understanding this. As I said before I fully believe that the BBFC is a neccesary organisation, but banning it is essentially saying that it is too violent for adults to play it. How can it possibly be so bad that it is deemed unsuitable for EVRERYONE IN THE COUNTRY?

  • ExplodingClown #169 5 years ago

    Hostel was shit, and one of the very few films where I wanted the protagonists to die within the first 10 minutes.

    Manhunt was tiresomely repetitive, ugly to look at and cheaply played the provocation card for sales.

    If this forces Rockstar to rely less on hype, and pander less to the hostile teenage moron market, I'm for it. The problem is that this 'ban' will be used as leverage against the industry in general, and potential casualties might include genuinely quality titles that happen to include gritty violence, rather than just being sadowank.

  • kangarootoo #170 5 years ago

    @Daymare

    "the problematic part of your reasoning is that, in this case, just because you agree with BBFC decision, you (of course) think it is the Right decision."

    Whooooaa, let me stop you right there! You point me to any part of any comment I made where I said this was the right descision, or that I agreed with it in this case. Because as I see it, if I'm not being rude, the problematic part of your reasoning is the bit where you misrepresented what I have been saying, in order to pick holes in points I never made.

    The point I have made all along is that the BFC represent the wishes of the general public. I don't believe I ever voiced an opinion on this particular case. My first comment in this thread was simply made to point out that most of the people venting had no bloody idea what they were talking about when it comes to how the BFC makes their descisions, and who they represent in their desicion making role.

    "Anybody (adult enough) should have ALL the rights to buy Manhunt 2 if they want to, they're not hurting anybody with their decision."

    In YOUR opinion, they are not hurting anyone. And in mine too for that matter. But that isn't the point, as I say again, my opinion on this particular case was never any part of the points I was making.

    We live in a society where rules are formed to represent and protect the populace as a whole. Not everyone will agree, so some of the opinions on which the rules are based will seem absurd to some members of the populace, but that doesn't affect the underlying principle of democracy (which is what created the BFC in the first place).


    @Nithron

    Oh man, need I really make this point time after time. The "rights" that are being violated here are the rights of those who wish to be able to buy this game. Now you say that selling the game would impinge no-one's rights, but in fact it would impinge the perceived rights who believe the sale of this game would put the public at risk somehow.

    Now you don't share their belief, so of course it seems like nonsense to you and of course as far as you can tell no rights would be impinged. I would suggest (somewhat cheekily) that it only appears that way to you because you aren't capable of seperating your own opinion from fact.

    FOR THE RECORD, I don't believe sane people commit murder because of video games, but the jury is out on whether a video game act as a trigger for someone already unhinged. In this particular case I wouldn't mind one bnit if the game went on sale, so long as its sale was restricted to adults (though that specific detail isn't relevant here).

    BUT, I am able to seperate my own opinion from fact. I simply have my opinion, mine, no one elses. I generally inform my opinions as much as I can, but I'm not some ancient wise spirit, so I accept that my opinion is nothing more than my mind making descisions based on the info it has to hand. To assume that your opinion is the correct one is to surely assume that you will never change your opinion, because fact doesn't change, right? I have changed my opinion many times on many things in my life, and each time it happens I realise just how fickle we all are.

    I absolutely respect the RIGHT of others to disgree with me, and because we don't live in a dictatorship with me on the throne, I absolutely accept that sometimes laws and rules will be formed that I disagree with, because those laws and rules are created by opinions that I disgree with, but still respect.

    Sorry if that went on a bit, but I kind of get riled when people put words into my mouth. Here is a great way to avoid misuse of the old "so you are saying..." mechanic..... read the words I write and respond only to those words. I guarantee they represent exactly what "I am saying".

  • Ryze #171 5 years ago

    BAN THIS SICK FILTH!!!!!

    Oh wait...

    /books Amsterdam ticket @ Jet2.com...

  • spitfire1945 #172 5 years ago

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

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

    It's unfair, especially for the Wii, not to have this kind of games on the shelves.
    And by the way, I'm from Italy, but I'm still concerned on my freedom of choice!

    Let's do something!
    Edited by spitfire1945 at 19/06/07 @ 23:29

  • Daymare #173 5 years ago

    @kangarootoo

    Oh, yes, it seems I've misinterpreted your stance and I apologize - I didn't know we're in a sort of agreement!:)

    "The point I have made all along is that the BFC represent the wishes of the general public."

    I know this is how the democratic society works - we elect some people and they run things for us. But those "wishes of general public" is always a very elusive concept. Whos' "we"? If 50% of USA people voted for Bush, should other half really just be quiet and bow their heads, while he's doing all the stupid things he does? I know that in the end that is exactly what happens, but I guess I'm an idealist and wish it didn't. I hate "sheep" mentality and other (equal) people deciding for me what is right and what is wrong. That's all I was actually saying. It *might* be harmful for society for this game to "run wild", hell I'm not that pretentiuos to say I know all ends, but I just can't put the "this kind of censorship is fundamentaly wrong" sentiment to rest.

    If you can understand that sentiment, then we're on the same page:) I could go on (and on, hehe) about other subjects (again) raised in your last post, but this really is far too complex a matter to disect it in the EG forums and I'll let myself believe we also agree on that;)

    ta - ta

  • Waldo #174 5 years ago

    My nine-year-old was really looking forward to this. :(

  • cobracotton #175 5 years ago

    ok where can I order a copy of this bad boy from?

    banned video games reminds me of the eighties when they banned video nasties...

    its probably a hat tip toward the CoE...

    I think society needs more and more shocking content just to impact, some of the spotty little twats who post on here would not bat an eyelid at Mortal Kombat yet I remember there being problems with the RED blood in that release...

    Free Marketing + internet shopping = congratulations Rockstar you got yourselves another HIT Seller!!!

    do you think customs would send you to guantanomo bay if they caught you trying to import a copy of this game?

  • poisse #176 5 years ago

    As the tabloid/general public backlash on this already proves, video game nasties are bad for our reputation as gamers. Why on earth do we NEED a game where you go through the motions (on Wii) of sawing somone's head open? There are thousands of more worthwhile games out there: let's not forget the last banned game was in 1997 & that the last Manhunt was shit...

    So please, just forget this sick, pointless game... uneless you want Joe Public to make it representative of gaming as a whole & once again label us pyscopaths
    Edited by poisse at 20/06/07 @ 06:06

  • witchdrash #177 5 years ago

    Hmm what's that? Ahh it's the sound of me not caring.

    If only the BBFC would ban games for being utter shit there might be a load of better games on the market than the piles of bs that we get saddled with,

  • kangarootoo #178 5 years ago

    @Daymare

    "But those "wishes of general public" is always a very elusive concept"

    Hey, I never said democracy actually works :) I tend to believe that although democracy is the most "fair" system, it is actually deeply flawed (due to the fact that most of the general public don't know enough about the world to make big descisions, me included). Don't know what actual system would work better in its place though, its probably the best option we have outside of philosiphical ideals.

    I read something a while ago that has always stuck with me. It said that most people misunderstand the point of an elected government. You do not vote for the person or party who will do exactly what you tell them, you vote for the person or party who you believe is best skilled to run the country (this does not of course, mean they will ALWAYS do things you agree with). A tangent somewhat as the BBFC aren't governmental, but I think it is relevant to the general discussion.

  • kangarootoo #179 5 years ago

    Overall I might add, this has been a really good thread. Lots of disgreement (which is great) and very little calling each other names (which kills discussion).

    \o/

  • Ranger101 #180 5 years ago

    You know people, that if you really want this game to come out, all you have to do is send in masses of protests/petitions to the BBFC. As Kangaroo says, they do represent the public opinion on taste & decency, and as Spiderman proved, the BBFC can be forced to reclassify and even change their rules if there is public outcry.

    But please don't, I actually do agree with the BBFC on this game. I think the key words that make this game pretty dangerous are 'context', 'immersion' and 'emapthy'. I don't want some unhinged fuckers out there using this as a practice tool, or even for 'normal' folks to get desensitised to the idea (and motions) of sawing someone's head open.

    Not to mention the bolstering the negativity of the stereotype of being a gamer.

    Oh and for those spouting GTA or Postal - those games have a degree of distance/seperation that make the gamer lose immersion in the game - GTA/Postal have elements that make the game almost comedic. Manhunter sells itself on complete immersion.