Manhunt game withdrawn from UK Store

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

With respect Baron, you seem to be placing words in my mouth. I didn't say the magazines made the games, I didn't say the games caused the incident and I didn't call for anything to be banned.

However, the games magazines and the software houses are part of the same industry and both are pushing sensationalsim for the sake of it. My complaint though is not that the games are violent but that violence is all they have to sell them.

I apologise; that was not my intention.

You are maintaining a stronger link than exists between magazine journalists and games companies though- beyond some corrupt journos taking money for inflating scores, the game makers don't have much of a say in what the article says.

The simple way to protest about that is not to buy the games. That is all you need to do. The makers give the public what they appear to want. If you want to blame someone for violent, sensationalist games, blame the idiots who buy them - the public. Don't buy magazines which give inflated scores to shitty games. Tell them.

Quote[/b] ]

I'm not wanting an end to violent games, I want them to make good games. I want to see magazines boasting "the BEST shooter ever". As far as I'm aware a lot of these titles like 'Manhunt' are not especially big sellers once people realise how poor the games are. I've certainly not played 'Manhunt' because every review I've seen said clumsy, limited and shallow. 'Vice City' on the other hand I played through to the end and enjoyed. I've got more than enough violent games and movies in my collection. I would primarily describe them as good games and videos though.

Good. If a games particularly good, recommend friends/ family to buy it too.

Pressure groups don't place these stories on front pages.

Who does then? They do, I have to disagree. They start phoning up and emailing everywhere they can think of, kick up a disproportionate fuss, and get 'news.' The mother of the killer in this case immediately started blaming games, instead of her bad parenting.

Quote[/b] ]

And we have to assume that all the journalists knew the facts in the case.

A lot of journalists, especially tabloid journalists, wouldn't know the truth if it battered fuck out of them in their local pub during their hour long lunchbreak, and wouldn't care anyway; all they care about is ratings and viewers. (Although not all of them, by any means)

[Pathy 0]

As far as i can see Bals is saying that certain content should not be in games. Basically, if a game celebrates murder then it should be banned?

Very difficult to decide......very difficult.....once you get into banning say, murder in games, you lose alot of good games....

In Manhunt, it looks like you are killing for the sake of killing and the sheer "fun" of killing....i think this is probably what you mean Bals.....in games like Max Payne and OFP, you are not killing people soley for kicks off the act, its story driven, its not glorified, ect.....

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

Quote[/b] ] You seem to be saying 'some games should be banned because I don't like them.'

I have a problem with that statement.

No, I don´t seem to be saying that. You´re trying to make it look like that but I don´t say such.

And as I made no statement like that you´re obviously having a problem with something you are trying to make up. As I said . Read my posts.

Yes

Quote[/b] ]Postal 2 celebrate the method of killing with weird weapons in a very unhuman and disturbing way

It´s my opinion that games wich celebrate manslaughter in a very disturbing way should be forbidden.

As snuff videos are forbidden.

Can you see the diffence anymore ?

I don´t need such nor I don´t want such ) or Postal 2 celebrate the method of killing with weird weapons in a very unhuman and disturbing way.

This should be forbidden.

Bals, I am not trying to make it look like anything. I'm trying to figure out what you are saying.

If you are using some other meaning of forbidden then please tell me, but as far as I am aware its fairly synonymous with 'banned.'

I notice you have not answered anything to do with the censorship issue. I don't expect you to; its impossible. You cannot ban 'bad' games without banning good games.

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

As far as i can see Bals is saying that certain content should not be in games. Basically, if a game celebrates murder then it should be banned?

Very difficult to decide......very difficult.....once you get into banning say, murder in games, you lose alot of good games....

In Manhunt, it looks like you are killing for the sake of killing and the sheer "fun" of killing....i think this is probably what you mean Bals.....in games like Max Payne and OFP, you are not killing people soley for kicks off the act, its story driven, its not glorified, ect.....

I just did 2 minutes research and found the story for manhunt. Yes, it has a story (its extremely similar to the Arnie film 'Running Man' which, while not a great film, wasn't really violent for the sake of it). No, it's not about killing for the sake of killing. Its about killing to survive.

It is story driven. It IS glorified, but then so is violence in other games.

Still waiting for anyone to give me an example of how to ban 'bad' games without banning good games (GTA counts as a good game, BTW)

[Pathy 0]

Also,

some people are more impressionable than others. If this guy was on drugs, then it becomes even worse. It is not the games fault, an impressionable and drugged up person could be influenced by TV, a Film, music, a magazine article, whatever, they are like putty for moulding, if you start banning violent games, you need to ban all types of violence so we live in a world of pink fluffy bunnies and cream cakes.......

[Pathy 0]

I just did 2 minutes research and found the story for manhunt.  Yes, it has a story.  No, it's not about killing for the sake of killing.     Its about killing to survive.  

It is story driven.  It IS glorified, but then so is violence in other games.

Still waiting for anyone to give me an example of how to ban 'bad' games without banning good games (GTA counts as a good game, BTW)

Consider myself corrected.

Although it does have a main selling point that boasts about its violent deaths.

You cannot ban some games without banning others. As i said in the post you quoted, you start banning murder and there go alot of good games.

[ReaperY2K 0]

The thing that amuses me (possibly wrong choice of word) is that they are prepare to ban a game blaming it as being the source of a violent act.....yet they r still prepared to allow WWE wrestling to be shown early mornings with a target audiance of 10+ year olds. Everyone has heard stories of how sum kid has decided to copy a move he saw on that an injure sum1 (even heard of sum1 having their kneck broken as a result). For a while my brother (13) went around doing this to his friends and as a result got a small suspension (10 at the time).......lets ban this too then as it promotes violance to impressionable youngsters!!!!!

We have violance shown on tv everyday in the form of the NEWS but that is still allowed to be shown at all times and viewed by all ages....lets ban that too.

Why should the world get punished due to the acts of a few.

p.s B4 we had video games what excuses were used for murder? ....they blamed it on movies, b4 that music! its too easy to blame different forms of media instead of looking at the fact there could be grudges or mental problems (schizophrenia etc).

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Please! I played Primal Rage, a fighting game, since I was 7 and I turned out alright......

>_>

<_<

*shoots venom and teleports*

But seriously, I have known people who played games more than me and they turned out alright. I mean, videogames didn't INVENT violence.

we are not talking about "games" in general but about what "some" games might have as an impact on "some" people.

I dont know how you people were brought up but I wasnt allowed to watch horror films and I wouldnt have been able to play this game either. Dont want to judge what these things can do to a teenager but we all remember those freaks from school that loved Karate-films and were allowed to watch anything they wanted. And yes, they turned out freaks (well actually they always were).

I sincerely believe in a certain protection of the sensitivity-level of teenagers. Dont spoil them with too much realism too early, they are gonna turn adult early enough!

[SpecOp9 0]

Ok, I have something to say about it.

Might be a bit bumpy, but bare with me moderators  

First of all.  What kind of stupid idiotic moron would believe a videogame like Manhunt, quite a comical game would drive any stupid wacked-up kid to kill others?

A videogame can't buy you a knife, but a parent can.

A videogame can't drive a kid crazy, but parents can.

A videogame can't sell itself to a underage person, but a parent can purchase it.

A videogame can't neglect their kids, but parents can.

A videogame can't buy a gun, can't cock it, can't pull the trigger.

Yet here are grownups still living in the monkey age, believing they are'nt to blame.  What's that word I'm looking for?

Ohh yes, Morons.

Parents: Wake up call - You are idiots. We are banning everything because of stupid ass mothers and fathers who don't know how to take care of their own kid. Fireworks for example was banned in Massachusetts because of some brainless parent.

See, the story begins with this dumbass mother. Her son wanted to play with fireworks and she said he could outside, WITHOUT PARENTAL SUPERVISION, and clearly it said on the box WARNING: Keep out of reach from children. Children may only use under parental supervision! But no. This dumbass lets her young son outside with fireworks by himself. Wanna know what happened? The dumb kid somehow managed to blow his head off... And now, the mother sues the firework company, and Massachusetts makes a new state law : Fireworks are Prohibited. Because of a stupid ass parent, because of an even stupider person being the kid, we now cannot use fireworks.  But we still do anyway. Screw the law.

Cops don't even follow it. lol.

Parents...do us all a favor. If you are a complete idiot and have not evolved fully to the 21st century. Please insert head into heavy machinery and kill yourself. We don't need you.These bullshit rules are not because of kids. It's because of parents and parenthood. We are making our world "Parent Proof" and "Grownup Proof" with laws that can't even fit in the books.

Quit blaming shit on videogames and blame yourselves for once.

idiots.

p.s. that was'nt aimed towards you guys.

But who knows, maybey a dumb parent will come by and read this.

[Major Fubar 0]

Here's a headline I'd like to see just once:

Neglectful parents accept responsibility for semi-psychotic child's bahaviour.

[Balschoiw 0]

You all know that parents nowadays dont sit on your shoulder 24 hours a day. And you all know that most of your parents obviously don´t know wich games you play. Right ?

Sure they have responsibility, but game developers have a responsibility either so has the government, so have schools, so have media in general.

Or do you really believe that only parents are guilty for more than ever violence among children and teenagers ?

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

You all know that parents nowadays dont sit on your shoulder 24 hours a day. And you all know that most of your parents obviously don´t know wich games you play. Right ?

Sure they have responsibility, but game developers have a responsibility either so has the government, so have schools, so have media in general.

Or do you really believe that only parents are guilty for more than ever violence among children and teenagers ?

That's not answering the censorship questions.

And you're wrong.

Its the parents responsibility to know what their kids are doing. They don't have to be there 24 hours a day, they just have to take a slight interest in their kids and know what they like doing.

Game developers, TV, etc are NOT responsible for raising the children of fuckwit lazy parents.

[SpecOp9 0]

exactly

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]Game developers, TV, etc are NOT responsible for raising the children of fuckwit lazy parents.

But they are responsible for content control. That´s it.

BIS is best example. Or don´t you think that a lot of people would like to have bodies that splatter and limbs flying through the air. Does BIS do it this way? No they say they have a responsibility to follow and that´s what I mean.

Quote[/b] ]That's not answering the censorship questions.

Would you pls hold your breath ? I did not say that I want total censorship. I neither used the word itself. So pls hold it.

And you have always done what your parents wanted you to do, right ?

[Pathy 0]

Games like the UT series have flying limbs, and those are popular. If kids get to play such games, fault STILL comes back to the parents.

I know the point your trying to make with your final sentence....that kids will go against thier parents wishes.....well they STILL need an adult to either buy them the game or to turn a blind eye when they go to buy it. And parents should still take a little time to monitor thier children to make sure they dont HAVE games with unsuitable content.

Surely a parent notices when a child starts acting a little wierd? My parents grew quite concerned over all the gun pictures i have on this PC, when i explained that they are used to model and texture for OFP, they were happy with it, but the point is THEY KNEW, even though im 18 they still are aware what goes on in my life. Its not like they spend hours monitoring me, they dont need to to just be aware. If another parent doesn't know thier own kids activities, then they shouldnt have ever become parents. It is, quite frankly, negligent.

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

ah come on, there is a slight difference between UT and Manhunt...

If you dont see this difference then I may assume you dont have a clue about out argumentation

It is like "knifes" are weapons too, if you ban guns you should ban knifes too.

[Pathy 0]

I assume by your assumption that YOU dont have a clue about this argument, given that ive been in it from the start.

If you read the last 3 or 4 posts properly, you would realise that Bals was talking about OFP having limbs that fly off

Quote[/b] ]Or don´t you think that a lot of people would like to have bodies that splatter and limbs flying through the air

Well, UT has this and its still popular.

try reading it again, im not going to argue what ive just spelled out, especially if your going to ignore it, and then insult me.

[John C Flett 0]

Quote[/b] ]I apologise; that was not my intention.

Apology accepted. And while you are correct in what you say that games companies don't control the magazines the magazines still make some of the same bad choices.

I may be misreading things and of course in different countries the situation may be different. It does strike me that when there is a new adult targeted movie it is sold to adults. Kids don't get a 'Kill Bill' trailer when they go to the latest PG comic flick. Likewise magazines with a primarily young audience don't fill there pages with stills of dismembered limbs from the final fight.

However kids games magazines will still put the latest 18cert game on the cover and fill several pages with detailed description and screenshots. They might even stick a toned down demo on the cover. They know this game is not for kids yet they will ( along with games publishers ) make kids as aware of it as possible. While this doesn't absolve the parental responsibility issue it doesn't help it either.

I think there is also a distinction that needs made between 'unsuitable for children' and 'mature'. I have always felt that a lot of these games were anything but mature.

Film is such a different medium that its hard to make exact parallels but I guess you might look at 'Freddy vs Jason' and 'The hours'. Neither are really suitable for kids but only one is mature. We need more mature games and less which are targeted to an audience that is not really meant to have them.

I've seen from this mornngs hysterical headlines that the Mail ( I think ) is now including 'Mafia', 'Hitman' and 'Unreal tournament' in their crusade. Not perhaps a bad thing in that these games are of such a different order that it will probably point out how stupid they're being.

I'm sure this nonsense will die down as its done before. We're a long way from the depths of the video nasty days but mayby some people making and selling games might like to think twice about some of the tactics they use. We've seen an end to the overt shock ads that companies like VIE used to use and I don't think we're any poorer as players for it. Mayby we might see ideas like gameplay being valued over shock in the game also.

[Pathy 0]

Back when i was a lad (those were the days) you couldnt buy a mag with an 18 rated demo on the front if you werent 18.....i think here its the magazine retailer who doesnt check whos at fault....

I'm talking about PC gamer and PC zone, both targeted at older gamers

Quote[/b] ]Film is such a different medium that its hard to make exact parallels but I guess you might look at 'Freddy vs Jason' and 'The hours'. Neither are really suitable for kids but only one is mature. We need more mature games and less which are targeted to an audience that is not really meant to have them.

Good point, some games are adult ratings because its needed as part of thier content to make it believable. Mafia is a good example here. Some games need adult ratings because they are trying to be sensationalist. Personally i'd like to see more "mature" games, as they are generally better content wise, rather than games whos best content item is the ability to kill people in 4000 different ways....but it still doesnt mean they should ban them.....

.....Again this goes back into the "you cant censor one without accidently censoring the other" argument, which i agree with, but maybe developers should take it upon themselves to not make games which are sensationalist just for the sake of being sensationalist.

Which means i actually kinda agree with Bals about developers own principles while agreeing with Baron over the censorship and bad parenting issue (with the veiw that in this "Manhunt" case, if it was anything to do with this game, then it was in the end down to parental negligence....thats ignoring the fact the guy was planning to get money to pay a drug dealer with by his own admission...)

I personally do not reckon this game can be held responsible any more. (responsible doesnt = it should be banned)

[Skul 0]

I just don't understand why the media blame games when some moron playing a violent game thinks: "Gee, if you can do it in a game, you can do it in real life!"

Don't blame the game, blame the moron. After all, he used the weapon, he killed somebody, he did the act, NOT the game! I don't ever recall having to restrain my copies of Doom, Duke Nukem, etc from going out and killing someone.

I'm calling the killer a moron because he thinks that acting out violent game scenarios is okay in real life. And then there's people think these games should stop being produced, the companies making them should close down/get sued and crap like that. Alright, I'll sit down and play that game which makes you go insane and kill people (supposedly). A million bucks says I don't go crazy and try to kill you.

My sympathies go out to the victim's family.

[Colossus 2]

Manhunt withdrawn from Norwegian stores too.

Whatever! I wouldn't have played it, looks crapy and the newspaper gave it a score 2 (6 is maximum score)

¨Brutal bullshit game¨ one newspaper called it.

I for example have played Doom II when I was 9 years old   (Didn't effect me, I still got etichs and moral)

and I still don't walk around killing people becouse I have played plenty of violent games, neither have I ever thought about killing.

I don't see why this can have any effect on 17 year old boys,

this is individual problem not the games foult.

Solution: Play The Sims, I still do    

[Pathy 0]

Hahaha Sims makes me want to go out and hurt someone.....mainly the games makers.......

[bn880 5]

i agree that children will mimic what they see or hear in the media, but its not the media's responsibility in making sure children don't bring a gun to school nor is it the governments. my parents never let me watch any violent movies when i was little. sometimes i could watch something if they were there w/ to cover my eyes or ears when ever something bad would happen as i was growing up, if a kid commited a crime, the parents would be held responisble for their kids behaviour. but i guess today anybody can blame the next person.

I don't know about that anymore, when you see seemingly normal social behaviour in movies/TV shows but always solving problems with weapons, it may have a _very_ negative impact on children and teens. As you probably know, a lot of people are confused in their real life by Hollywood effects for explosions and wounds, why can they not get confused about more serious social issues.

I don't know, but I would say the majority of films which wave guns and show violence for no realistic reason should be rated S, for Stupid.

EDit: At some point at least in America people are going to have to admit to their failure in raising children, as children learn most from their peers and TV not their adults, so at least controlling some of the content may be important?

Edit2: You have to understand what I'm saying, when a movie is depicting fictional war, almost anything goes but should be rated. When a movie depicts past wars, it should be evaluated not to be completely inaccurate... but whne a movie shows some business relations in New York, don't be f***ng waving guns and assasinating the characters, ban that crap straight off. In the same sense OFP would never get banned, because it depicts war times in an accurate manner, without some of the more serious results of war (civil casualties) but still.

[Pathy 0]

Thats why we have a ratings system.

[bn880 5]

Yeah you do, but why is most of your TV content filled with BS violence.