Manhunt 2 will get UK release

By Ellie Gibson Published 14 March, 2008

BBFC had "no alternative" but to give in.

The BBFC has been given "no alternative" but to issue Manhunt 2 with an 18 certificate.

The Video Appeals Committee voted by a majority of four to three to allow the long-contested game to go on sale in the UK.

Manhunt 2 was was resubmitted to the VAC in January, to be judged under "new guidelines" specified by the High Court.

The BBFC has routinely opposed the game and was not happy at the result.

"As I have said previously, we never take rejection decisions lightly, and they always involve a complex balance of considerations," said BBFC director David Cooke.

"We twice rejected Manhunt 2, and then pursued a judicial review challenge, because we considered, after exceptionally thorough examination, that it posed a real potential harm risk.

"However, the Video Appeals Committee has again exercised its independent scrutiny. It is now clear, in the light of this decision, and our legal advice, that we have no alternative but to issue an 18 certificate to the game."

No new release date for Manhunt 2 has been announced.

Picture of Ellie.

About Ellie Gibson

Since joining Eurogamer in the mid 2000s, Ellie has written about subjects as diverse as the fall of Gizmondo, the rise of Hollyoaks actresses in Red Alert games and the noise a bear makes under NSFW circumstances.

Read more articles from Ellie by visiting the Ellie Gibson archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (86) Latest comment 4 years ago

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

  • thisisatempaccount #1 4 years ago

    A good day for freedom of speech, freedom of expression, and gamers who can only crack one out to depictions of garden-strimmer decapitations everywhere.

    The result of the BBFC's campaign will of course be to turn a mediocre game that nobody wanted into a playground must-have. Way to go gramps!

  • bad09 #2 4 years ago

    Big deal, it's still crap game........

  • thefilthandthefury #3 4 years ago

    Good news. I'm sure the game is merely average, but it's still good to know that it's going to be released.

  • Waffleaber #4 4 years ago

    A victory over censorship then.

    Shame they didn't put as much effort in the game as they did on getting it released.

  • chris_ace #5 4 years ago

    Post deleted at 11:55:13 13-12-2011

  • Brogan #6 4 years ago

    glad of the result. hope no one feels the need to buy this sad little game.

  • mischief #7 4 years ago

    Brilliant!! Can't wait to see conversions of Saw and Hostel making their way on to the Wii.

  • myiagros #8 4 years ago

    In an ideal world rockstar would have spent the last few months improving the game while waiting for the decsion to be over-ruled, i doubt it though.

    Sounds like a perfect solution, what with devs always wanting more time before release and all.

  • gimo80 #9 4 years ago

    Does anyone really care anymore? -_-

  • nick_f Verified Senior Producer, Microsoft #10 4 years ago

    Sanity prevails! I quite enjoyed this on PSP, glad that people will get the chance to make up their own mind.

  • Fitzmogwai #11 4 years ago

    Does anyone really care anymore?

    I'm sure Keith Vaz does.

    Start the timer...
    Edited by 1 at 14/03/08 @ 12:38

  • GiarcYekrub #12 4 years ago

    Finally I might get a Wii now

  • X201 #13 4 years ago

    It's not often I quote Jasper Carrott, but there's an apt time for everything...

    "Why's it banned?"
    " 'cuz it's crap"




    Edited by 1 at 14/03/08 @ 12:47

  • Saladin #14 4 years ago

    Two posts. That's all it took for someone to miss the point.

    The issue with Manhunt 2 isn't the quality of the game, it's the censorship that was important. Adult gamers have a right to play adult software, much the same as we have the right to watch any 18 movie or read whichever gorey horror novel we choose.

  • crazyhorse174 #15 4 years ago

    All this over what basically amounts to CARTOON VIOLENCE.

    Err...no. Its not like Tom and Jerry - its depicted as being serious.

    And to join in, yes...it is a crap game.

  • Hobo #16 4 years ago

    Somewhere out there, someone who plays video games will care about this news. I'm sure of it. Well, probably.

    No?

  • the_dudefather #17 4 years ago

    now they can plaster THE GAME THEY TRIED TO BAN!!!!! all over the box

  • Veldaban #18 4 years ago

    Thank god censorship has been beaten so we can now all enjoy the game's message of extreme nihilism. There'd have been no other games that would have provided this otherwise...

  • prolific8 #19 4 years ago

    Freedom of expression and common sense finally wins out. A good day for those of us who value making our own decisions on what we do and don't play.

  • trav #20 4 years ago

    Its coming out?

    Oh.. great.. I suppose.

    Still not going to buy it.

  • Eighthours #21 4 years ago

    Vaz am cry.

  • BBIAJ #22 4 years ago

    Will this be the original submission, or the re-edited version?

  • BillyBrush #23 4 years ago

    Game isn't released, yet people all know it's a crap, sad little game

    I guess i need to get one of these crystal balls myself

    metacritic 6.9 avg user avg 8.7 suggests it's an above average title

    i like a bit of dinge (Condemned, Manhunt1) and am not a psycho, so look forward to buying it and enjoying it

  • BillyBrush #24 4 years ago

    @BBIAJ

    it's the censored version

  • bozman #25 4 years ago

    It's the US edited version that'll be released.

    Can hope that Holland gets uncut but doubtful otherwise it'd be released already. They'll just press the one master for Europe.
    Edited by 1 at 14/03/08 @ 13:13

  • BBIAJ #26 4 years ago

    @BillyBrush:

    Damn, I thought it might be... :o(

  • Aretak #27 4 years ago

    "Game isn't released, yet people all know it's a crap, sad little game"

    Yes, because we all wait for a UK release before playing a game.

    You plonker.

  • jonsaan #28 4 years ago

    Nobody gives a shit. Shit game, interest levels raised because of some made up controversy. Job done.

  • BBIAJ #29 4 years ago

    R* didn't make up the fact that the BBFC banned it though, you pleb.

  • RazorObsession #30 4 years ago

    if the whole selling point was the gore and depiction of violence, and that has now been censored, and the game play wasn't that good to begin with, then the appeal of this game should be Zero. Hooray for freedom and all that, but the games been castrated, and no one gives a toss either way. its not a win for liberty REALLY is it? the fact that there was a banning and that they had to censor it in the first place is a loss for freedom in my eyes.

  • Kami #31 4 years ago

    +1 to the "Glad it's released but it's still crap" party.

    The BBFC have to have some power though over content and censorship, otherwise there's zero point of having a ratings system in the first place. The ratings system, as it is, is utterly broken and not helped that most parents and guardians don't give a flying shit about the age rating on the box. They'll still buy it for their spoilt little cuntish children. The system needs a review, and a possible overhaul, as well as a good ad campaign reminding parents and guardians that age ratings are given for a reason - to restrict and reflect the content contained within. After that, if parents want to buy it for their little cunts then so be it. They were warned.

  • asphaltcowboy #32 4 years ago

    /waits for the Daily Mail et al to jump on board and start waffling on about how bad it is and how it was responsible for that murder that it totally wasn't responsible for and all that 8)
    Edited by 1 at 14/03/08 @ 13:33

  • Bongo #33 4 years ago

    "In an ideal world rockstar would have spent the last few months improving the game while waiting for the decsion to be over-ruled, i doubt it though.

    Sounds like a perfect solution, what with devs always wanting more time before release and all. "

    Except you'd have to resubmit it to the BBFC if you'd changed anything.

  • DFawkes #34 4 years ago

    The sad thing is without this legal stuff people would just have read the mediocre reviews and stood well clear. Not it's "the game they kept trying to ban!" I almost want it now, just to see how gory it is, but I know it'll be nothing at all worth looking at - Doctor Who is probably worse!

  • kangarootoo #35 4 years ago

    @Kami

    Good post.

    Everyone winges on about the BBFC, but they don't have cart blanc to set the rules, they simply follow them.

    If the rules need changing or updating, fair enough. That doesn't mean the BBFC don't have an important role to play. Except of course for those who frequently trumpet "I am an adult and should be able to do whatever I want", to which my response is simply "no you shouldn't, shut up idiot adult with the mind of a child".


    As for the game itself. I personally feel so uninterested in it that I'm not even sure I can bring myself to join the "glad its released but its crap" party. Don't know how I feel about it being released. As usual, I don't just consider these things in terms of what I do or don't want to play, but also how any given title may be perceived by the public at large and how in turn it makes the games industry appear.

    If MH2 makes the mainstream look at gaming with distain, that is a bad thing. Freedom of speech is one thing, and its important, but it isn't the only thing that matters.

    If the cost is that gaming gets yet more bad press resulting in widespread misunderstanding and condemnation, and the reward is we all get to play a game that by many accounts isn't really that good, is that a good deal? I think probably not.

  • bioreit #36 4 years ago

    /Laughing at all the 'Yay for Freedom of Expression/Speech' cries.

    /Wonders when Rockstar became comparable to Martin Luther King and Emmeline Pankhurst.

  • Kyle #37 4 years ago

    @bioreit

    I don't think anyone's suggesting Rockstar is comparable to the likes of Martin Luther King - except for you, it seems- but the fact that adults are being given the ability to make up their own minds is obviously a good thing. The quality of the game is a non-issue for me, I'm extremely glad to see it's been released, but I doubt I'll buy it.

    @Kami
    "The ratings system, as it is, is utterly broken and not helped that most parents and guardians don't give a flying shit about the age rating on the box."

    Is there anything a rating system can do about that though? If a parent is hapy to buy their child an 18 rated game then surely they're going to do it, regardless of what system has been put in place.
    Edited by 1 at 14/03/08 @ 14:17

  • Benno #38 4 years ago

    Hmm, i actually want this now just to see what all the fuss was about

    hidden agenda?

  • Moz #39 4 years ago

    Kinda makes you wounder what the point of the BBFC is if they just get over ruled like this!!

  • bioreit #40 4 years ago

    @ kyle

    But they are, implicitly, by stating that this decision is a 'victory for freedom of speech / expression'.

    To myself and all of those I know, terms such as Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Expression are directly related to ideas such as inequality between races, sexes and religions and their subsequent victimisation. Included within this scope are those who are persecuted or denied rights purely on the basis of sexual orientation.

    Multinational games corporations potentially worth billions, making games for (comparatively) wealthy individuals (usually males) in a predominantly Western-style society do NOT, in our opinion, fit into any of the above categories.

    I mean, they've all had it so tough over the years, haven't they, what with all that persecution and hardship...

    Edit 1: "Is there anything a rating system can do about that though? If a parent is hapy to buy their child an 18 rated game then surely they're going to do it, regardless of what system has been put in place."

    Not the ratings system, no, but the law could (and should) be there to back up and enforce the BBFC's decisions, in similar ways to tobacco and alcohol licensing. I mean, how many times do off-licences get checked for selling to underage kids? Barely once in a blue moon - but still a thousand times more than your local Game or HMV.

    If the correct atmosphere is fostered - whereby ratings are given appropriately and parents and retailers know and expect to get into trouble for bypassing them - then I would have no problem with games like Manhunt 2 being released. As many have said here, it would be an adult game for adults to choose whether to play or not.

    But the sad fact is that the current ratings system is basically unheeded by the majority of parents and retailers and the enforcement of such ratings is basically non-existent and for anyone to believe that a sweeping "It's an adult game so adults should choose" attitude can be immediately and successfully implemented is guilty of the highest state of naivete.
    Edited by 1 at 14/03/08 @ 14:27

  • Kyle #41 4 years ago

    @bioreit

    Ok, I see your point, and perhaps touting it as a victory for freedom of speech is over selling it a little, but the fact remains that as an adult, being able to decide for yourself whether or not a game is suitable for you to play is an option that should have been available from the start, without all this commitee malarky.

    Don't get me wrong, I think the BBFC or an organisation of it's kind is wholly necessary for imposing age restrictions. But it shouldn't be able to flat out ban something. I've said this before but I don't believe that there is any software that will be 'harmful' to an otherwise healthy adult.

  • kangarootoo #42 4 years ago

    @Moz

    "Kinda makes you wounder what the point of the BBFC is if they just get over ruled like this!!"

    Oh come on, this is clearly the very definition of a special case. The BBFC hardly ban anything (maybe 2 titles a year, including games and DVD releases), and having their decisions overuled is even rarer still.


    Should we also throw out trial by jury just because occasionally someone has the case against them overturned at appeal?


    The "point" of the BBFC is to decide what rating the thousands of games and films that get released every year should have applied to them.

  • rashes #43 4 years ago

    so does this mean Ireland is the only country that banned it?
    :-(

  • bioreit #44 4 years ago

    @ Kyle

    I replied to your edited reply to kami in my original post, so you might want to look at that, as it seems I anticipated at least part of your line of reasoning in that response.

    But you might miss it, what with it being an edit!

  • bloodflowers #45 4 years ago

    Owned. I love it when self righteous governing bodies get slapped in the face.

    We're capable of making our own decisions, we don't need protecting from a videogame when we can pick up pretty nasty films like Hostel 2 at the local Tesco for five quid.

    Now that I have the freedom of choice in the matter, I will enjoy choosing to not buy the game, because it doesn't look that brilliant. Other people can choose to buy it. See how painless that was?

  • ParanoidZombie #46 4 years ago

    Manhunt 2 doesn't look more violent/disturbing/nihilistic than condemned 2, so why did they ban it to begin with? Rockstar's track record, i guess.

  • BillyBrush #47 4 years ago

    Aretak
    14-Mar-08 13:18:16 "Game isn't released, yet people all know it's a crap, sad little game"

    Yes, because we all wait for a UK release before playing a game.

    You plonker.


    Nice reply...

    Soooo....you own Manhunt 2 do you? ?

    ?
    ?

    give us the lowdown then..

  • IronCladChicken #48 4 years ago

    @bioreit
    But they are, implicitly, by stating that this decision is a 'victory for freedom of speech / expression'.

    It is a victory for freedom of choice... Not much of one admittadly, but definitly gives me a choice that I wouldnt have had otherwise.
    It also sets a precident for future cases - Which may actually be worth the trouble.

    That I choose to play (or not to play) this title should be my decision - not anyone elses & while I would appreacite the BBFC advising me of the content within the game, I think its up to be to decide wether I actually play it or not - I'm all grown up now, I can make that decision for myself.

    Not that I'll play the game - I hear its crap.

  • Daymare #49 4 years ago

    I'm so glad my mom allowed me to watch horror movies when I was a kid (judging by Kami's post, I must be a "spoiled cunt" for wanting to watch them...). Now that I'm grown up, I'm not a psycho serial killer, but just a big, rather geeky "horror buff". And before someone says "yeah, that's you, but that doesn't mean...": in my country, where rating system practicly doesn't exist (12 year old can go watch, I dunno, uncensored Hostel 2 without a problem), crime-rate isn't sky-high or something, but is in fact much lower (my estimate, don't have any proof or anything) compared to other countries, judging from what I read. We are small, though, but the point I'm making is, that bloody movies/games/whatever are, when it comes to harmful/bad influences to the individual/society, IMO, nothing compared to poverty, bad parenting, over-population etc. So, yeah, I'm defenitely in the "I'm glad it was released, but don't care about this particular title" camp.

  • LetsGo #50 4 years ago

    why are they letting them release this shite...!

    ...if only all crap games could be banned :*(

  • Kyle #51 4 years ago

    @bioreit
    Thanks for the heads up, I did miss your reply before.

    The thing is, this whole argument of whether or not kids get hold of this title is basically down to whether or not the kids parents buy it for them.

    As for your point of having "the correct atmosphere... whereby ratings are given appropriately and parents and retailers know and expect to get into trouble for bypassing them": I work in a games store and trust me, we know full well that we will get a fine and criminal record if we are caught selling an age restricted game to someone under-age. We are constantly reminded to do ID checks for any titles bearing BBFC ratings.

    I am wholly against the idea of banning a game because there is a potential risk of kids getting hold of something. If kids get hold of something they shouldn't have, its the responsiblty of the parent to make sure they don't have it in the first place. There is a risk of kids getting hold of lots of things they shouldn't have; cigarettes, films. These thing aren't banned because of it, though.

    I appreciate how difficult it must be to be a parent, and that its very easy for me to say all this when I'm not one myself, but I still think flat-out bans are not the way forward.

  • brooza #52 4 years ago

    They should release it as an R18, that way it's released, but it's only available from licenced sex shops
    Edited by 1 at 14/03/08 @ 15:00

  • kangarootoo #53 4 years ago

    Gets a mention on the BBC website.

    [link url=htt p://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7296278.stm
    ]http://ne ws.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/72...[/link]

    The part that actually stuck in my head was this from some Rockstar rep.

    "Rockstar Games is committed to making great interactive entertainment, while also marketing our products responsibly and supporting an effective rating system."

    Marketing products responsibly indeed. Ok.

  • Kyle #54 4 years ago

    @Daymare

    I agree with you there. My dad let me play adult games and watch adult movies when I was a kid. But he knew what was in them and not only let me play/watch them but also took responsibilty for me playing/watching them. As a result I saw and played a lot of very violent things when I was still in middle school. And as far as I'm aware I have yet to be involved in a single violent act. Ever. Seriously I'm a pussy really.

    If a parent makes an informed decision about letting their kids indulge in age restricted material then in my opinion thats their right.

  • Kyle #55 4 years ago

    @kangarootoo

    What have they done that can be considered irresponsible marketing?

  • FerrisBueller #56 4 years ago

    The point here really isn't to do with how good Manhunt 2 is. It's about videogames in general and how they are treated as an artform by regulatory bodies. The release is a good thing in a world where Saw IV is permissible but Manhunt 2 is not. It shouldn't work like that, and now, it won't.

  • BillyBrush #57 4 years ago

    @Kanga

    18 rated games like Gears of war have been marketed on TV pre watershed, Rockstar (apart from Bully) have been one of the only companies to advertise their 18 rated games post watershed (on TV anyway), and that's since GTA3

    they did forget to put the BBFC 18 logo on early versions of Manhunt1 but that seems to be a mistake not intentional

    you're confusing PR (getting news out there and in sites like this) and Marketing which is the ads, perhaps not digital ads where it's a free for all for everyone, R* have probably been the most responsible out there in terms of what time their products are shown on TV

  • skillian #58 4 years ago

    What have they done that can be considered irresponsible marketing?

    How about the GTA cocaine mirror?

    I actually think that's a seriously cool piece of marketing, but "responsible" is not a word you could used to describe it.

  • Schiraman #59 4 years ago

    Great, now that a blow for freedom and democracy has been struck we can get back to the everyday business of not buying crap games like Manhunt 2.

  • BillyBrush #60 4 years ago

    @Skillian

    for GTA3 they sent the press a GTA3 baseball bat

    but what you send the press and what you advertise to consumers are quite different...if they'd sold or advertised a cocaine mirror to anyone that would be terrible, but it's just for journos

  • Golgo #61 4 years ago

    I shall duly purchase this crock of a game for no other reason than to celebrate the fact that I can.

  • Kami #62 4 years ago

    @ Daymare;

    You seen kids these days when they want something? I went in a while back to buy... well... Dragon Quest if you must know, and a ten/eleven year old was throwing a strop at his mother over a game that was rated 18. His mom was so embarassed by her sons tantrum she picked it up (This was Woolworth's in Liskeard, Cornwall) and took it to the counter. The lady behind the counter barely batted an eyelid despite the strop being clearly visable and audible to all.

    Sorry. Kids today are spoiled cunts. I stand by my all-sweeping judgement. It's one thing to let your kid stay up and wtach the horror movies (Hell, I did! Especially Saturday nights, when there was Manga on Channel 4!), it's quite another to give into your childs temper tantrum and cave into buying an 18-rated game that really probably isn't very good anyway and only serves to please some twattish little child. I wanted a game as a kid, I had to save up and buy it. Or wait for my birthday or Christmas present. Rated or not (usually not), it had to be my money. I couldn't throw a tantrum and get what I wanted.

    I stand by the BBFC. They know that the age ratings system is a farce. It's ridiculous.

    edit; I realise I just named and shamed a store. But it happens, this isn't the first and it sure won't be the last so let's realise this shit happens and look at ways of dealing with it, eh?
    Edited by 1 at 14/03/08 @ 15:37

  • smelly #63 4 years ago

    It got 7/10 on most reviews i read..

    Since when has 7/10 been shit?

  • BillyBrush #64 4 years ago

    I stand by the BBFC. They know that the age ratings system is a farce. It's ridiculous.


    I think their line would be different as if the age system is a farce then they have no reason to exist

    I agree kids will get hold of games but the way around that is stiffer penalties to shops for breaking the law selling them not banning all 18+ games

  • Ryze #65 4 years ago

    Too late.

    BBFC are incompetent where games are concerned.

  • Kami #66 4 years ago

    I completely agree BillyBrush. Not only that but I honestly think an ad campaign reminding parents that age ratings aren't just there as some sort of decoration is necessary - we've had quit smoking, drink awareness, speed kills etc. Surely there's some space for ads to remind parents that the ratings are there for their benefit.

    It won't stop it completely. That much I know. But it's a start, and might show the Daily Mail crowd that will be honking their horns at this news that the industry is trying to do something about age-rated games falling into the hands of minors.

  • Beardedmonkey #67 4 years ago

    Yay freedom of expression, boo censorship etc...

    But given the current anti-game climate in politics at the moment isn't it slightly irresponsible of R* to be releasing a game like this?
    Its just giving the Daily Mail brigade a stick to beat us with.

    With the Mass Effect farrago at least we could point to the artistic merit and the scope of the game's narrative to expose the ill-founded criticism for what it was. Its going to be harder to defend a game where violence is the raison d'etre and the narrative is perfunctory at best.

    Perhaps if I thought that Manhunt 2 had some kind of merit beyond publicity-generation, and the associated cash benefits, I would be less sceptical.

    As it is, I can't help but feel that the reputation of the entire industry, and those who engage in videogaming as hobby, is going to suffer and all we gamers will have to show for it is a decidely mediocre game.

  • HelloWorld #68 4 years ago

    Finally. This is a victory for freedom. Whether it is as worthy as some other thing related to freedom of speech or whatever is pretty much totally irellevant. It's just important that people over the age of 18 should be able to watch/play/read what they like, provided it isn't produced in a way that violates other people's rights blah balh blah. So this is reassuring, although bothersome that it was such a big deal.

    I guess it keeps Vaz and the Daily Mail off the streets though. I'd hate to think what these dangerous minded people could do to me and my familiy if they didn't have a safe outlet like moral high horsing and championing the restriction of people's freedoms.

  • THEGREATMADMAN #69 4 years ago

    I'll probably buy this, since i'm a R* Fanboy

  • prolific8 #70 4 years ago

    @kangarootoo

    " Except of course for those who frequently trumpet "I am an adult and should be able to do whatever I want", to which my response is simply "no you shouldn't, shut up idiot adult with the mind of a child"."

    Since when is this is a case of "I should be able to do whatever I want"? Nobody is saying that. What they are saying is that as responsible adults they should have the right to choose whether this game is suitable for them or not. If you really think those people are idiots with the mind of a child then I feel sorry for you. There's plenty of countries out there that actively enforce a "government knows best policy"; since you clearly enjoy being controlled by faceless bureaucrats in grey suits, why don't you move to one?

  • BillyBrush #71 4 years ago

    Odd view that says if something is violent it is also stupid, and designed for stupid people imo

    I don't think that's the case, why does the origional manhunt have to be labelled as a stupid game?, it's not the least intelligent plotline i've ever played, in fact it was quite fascinating to me and all the more shocking as it was'nt full of super powered weapons

    it's Ok to lust over real world military hardware and watch gleefully as you're soldier does whats right and blasts X foreighners to dust, but it's wrong to have a game that attempts to actually give some wieght/nastiness to it's killing

    i'm not saying the games not a brutal and disturbing thing, it is, and in some ways that makes it more resonant to me than COD4, this could put you off violence, most of the other games make it inconsequential.

    There's a lot of people that hold up the game equivalent of Rambo as high art and then call the equivalent of Silence of the lambs/texas chainsaw massacre dumb...it's not ICO sure but it at least presents a character, rather than a floating arm holding a gun

  • bicky316 #72 4 years ago

    brooza - "They should release it as an R18, that way it's released, but it's only available from licenced sex shops"

    Why the hell did I find that so damn funny!?

  • smelly #73 4 years ago

    "Odd view that says if something is violent it is also stupid, and designed for stupid people imo "


    Especially when most people on these boards keep going on about games being crap because they're too "kiddy".

    I agree that violence shouldnt be necessary to make a game good.

    But i also agree that people should be able to buy what they want.

    Just banning games for being mediocre and violent.. There would be a lot of pissed off potential halo 3 owners..

  • smelly #74 4 years ago

    Oh.. and before people jump down my neck and start slagging me off.. if you think about what i did there...

    See.. The whole "something is crap" thing is subjective.

    Just because i personally dont like something (halo3) doesnt mean millions of people wont.. and doesnt make my opinion right. But what if i was in charge of banning it? See?

    As for the whole manhunt bollocks, there's been a hell of a lot more violent games approved by the bbfc, this one just got picked up because of the "supposed" (wrongly) connection of that kids death.

  • Frosty840 #75 4 years ago

    This game has been deliberately pushed out into the British market in order to give more credence to Brown when he pisses all over the Byron report at the end of the month and bans all videogames that don't feature hugging puppies as the main gameplay element.

    Hyperbole, of course.
    Probably...

  • montdidier #76 4 years ago

    It is a win against poor censorship.

    For those of you who keep saying it's a crap game, you can't possibly be saying this from first hand experience - so why do you keep harping on about it?

    IMHO the majority of films and games in the Horror Genre are pretty poor, yet many people enjoy them for what they are and they don't get seen so negatively. I fail to understand why so many of you paint this game with a harsher brush.
    Edited by 2 at 15/03/08 @ 11:35

  • mazk #77 4 years ago

    Does anyone know if its gonna be the original version released or the censored second version of the game that was also rejected?

  • montdidier #78 4 years ago

    From numerous other sources online, it appears it will be the toned down version released - like the US version.
    Edited by 1 at 15/03/08 @ 11:50

  • ph101 #79 4 years ago

    Good news for rational thinking people.

  • MrE26 #80 4 years ago

    About fucking time. The game isn't particularly good, and the uncut version's violence was OTT to the point of being comical, but the ban, particularly the 2nd one (of the toned down version) was a wrong decision. The game looks, plays & has a tone almost identical to the original, which was passed 18 without any trouble. In fact, Brian Cox constantly yelling in your ear for you to "butcher the fucking life out of" people arguably makes the original worse.
    For them to kick up such a ridiculous fuss about this one smacks of politics to me.
    The fact remains that this is a victory for freedom of choice & expression, regardless of how shit the game is.

  • drunkymonkey #81 4 years ago

    This is good news for the seven people that were going to buy it.

  • Arsenal1914 #82 4 years ago

    nice about time.

  • Gaol #83 4 years ago

    "BBFC are incompetent where games are concerned. "

    Can you justify this? They haven't chosen to try and ban a game for years; they didn't like Manhunt not because of the violence per se; but the context it was presented in - glorifying murder for the sake of it.

    I'm not a fan of censorship - but they're should always be some kind of line somewhere. A lot of folk seem to mix up 'freedom of speech' with 'anything goes'.

  • MGG #84 4 years ago

    And this "freedom of speech" nonsense - we in Britain do not have such a concept, will people stop getting their legal ideas from American cop shows please? And no country has true freedom of speech anyway - otherwise there would be no laws for slander.


    And to the person who advised moving to a coutry ran by faceless suits that decide what you can watch and listen to - well I did. The censorship is a pain (although not too bad - it could be argued that most of the TV is improved by not having a constant stream of violence and naked women on it) but the country is ran rather excelently. No over the top tax levels, hardly any crime (although some bugger had away with my phone grrrr), respect between people on the street, no teenage gangs, no fear, great public transport, I could go on. Maybe a "nanny state" isn't all bad.......Or maybe removing the idiotic UK press helps to change the atmosphere of an entire country, I don't know. It would be a start, anyway.

  • Charlie_Miso #85 4 years ago

    PS2WiiPortLOL

  • montdidier #86 4 years ago



    Agree with removing idiotic press.