Once again, the BBFC (British Board of Film Classification) has refused to rate Manhunt 2. This refusal is for the revised version.
You may recall that Rockstar made some tweaks to the original game after receiving a “no rating” in Britain and an “AO” in the U.S. The revisions managed to get an “M” here. However, the BBFC still doesn’t like the game.
Because the game has no rating, it can’t be sold in Britain. Likewise, the Irish board has also refused to rate MH2.
There isn’t any doubt in my mind this is censorship. MH2 isn’t my kind of game. In fact, from what I’ve read of it, it sounds rather loathesome. This is, of course, a matter of taste.
Other people have other views. That’s fine. What isn’t fine is when an organization supposedly meant to rate games refuses to do its job and becomes a censor.
No doubt it’s Manhunt 2 being a game rather than a film that’s the problem. The “games are for kids” misconception is still too prevalent, and it appears that this is the BBFC’s outlook.
Regardless, an organization that is supposed to provide ratings to games should not sit in judgment as to whether the game should be allowed, but rather decide on the appropriate audience for it, and apply the necessary rating.
In this instance, the BBFC is certainly not doing its job properly. Read the article and see what you think.
if their job is to rate it and haven’t rated it twice now, in an general public un-informed sense of view they certainly don’t seem to be ‘doing their job’.
as a gpus POV i’d say sue the bass turds. force them into giving a rating that can then be contested. it would seem without a rating their can be no protest.
Yeah, refusal to even RATE the game (as opposed to giving it a “hard to market” rating) is censorship.
Incidentally, here’s a hilarious review of Manhunt 1 (warning, strong language…)
Zero Punctuation: Manhunt
The game doesn’t sound the least bit like something I’d want to play, but he definitely throws around some great political commentary and makes it seem like much ado about nothing.
You know England has a list of movies you can’t buy either as they refuse to rate them. It is Censorship.
It’s also censorship to give a game and AO rating for the same content that would give a movie a PG-13 or R rating.
It’s also censorship that books are not rated but movies and games are. Let’s not forget the old comic book censorship days as well.
Of course I can play counter strike, Dod, and various other deathmatch modes of games online and “kill” hundreds of people a night complete with blood spraying the walls then “tea bag” their bodies. But that is okay by the ratings boards.
Thank God the ratings aren’t mandatory. What a mess.
Such a wonderful world we live in.
Great link Coyote, very funny.
I think Rockstar brings a lot of this on themselves. They release something for review that they know is never going to fly, but it sure does generate a lot of free publicity through controversy. That way they get to be perceived as trendy, hip, and rebellious. Then they release the real version. I just wonder if their strategy blew up in their face this time, when the toned down version was refused a rating as well.
I’m in favor of it receiving the maximum rating that it falls under. This is shock-gaming. If they suffered pain or hardship for having the game rated AO the first time, I’m sure the controversy more than made up for it (unfortunately).
Considering what had to be removed, I’d say it totally deserved the AO rating (and I’m willing to bet they fully expected and prepared for it…)
But no rating at all? If the British board is run by the government (in the U.S., it’s a private, independent organization, but I think in Britain it answers to the government), then it is totally censorship.
Report from Britain’s Sky News.
http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,91221-1288697,00.html?f=rss
Who would have ever thought that if there is no legal channel to get a game that people would get it by other means?
As I have said before, this isn’t my kind of game, but by outright banning it look at all the tax revenue they are losing. I also wonder how many people have modified their console to play it, and don’t stop at just downloading Manhunt 2. It’s a slipperly slope, even more so when someone behind you is pushing.
Xian, thanks for the link. Of course, no surprise that the game is already out there on the net and that many British players are downloading it.
Even more to the point, there is now no control on the age of the people downloading MH2, whereas there would be some had the game been allowed in stores.
So the British are not only losing money, they’re letting the game get into the hands of those who shouldn’t be playing it.
Censorship = Stupidity
Not to be outdone by England, Germany’s USK has refused to rate the upcoming Resident Evil: Umbrella Chronicles on the Wii, so it will not be available there. The rest of Europe received the equivalent of an Adults Only rating. Unlike Manhunt, this was one I might actually play sometime since the previous one was pretty good on the Gamecube. It’s also a big difference in my mind from killing zombies to the sadism of MH2.
http://wii.nintendo.co.uk/21572.html
I guess Australia was feeling left out too so they decided to ban Soldier of Fortune: Payback by refusing it a rating. I think what stands out in this one is that Australia doesn’t have an equivalent of an R Rating for 17 and above, just 15 and above.
http://au.gamespot.com/news/6181240.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=newstop&tag=newstop;title;1
Very odd about Australia, Xian. Didn’t know they hadn’t a rating for “M” audiences. I guess they still have the mindset of “Games = kids”. About time they woke up over there.
As for the others, I knew about Soldier of Fortune, but not Resident Evil.
Personally, I think this whole European rating business is ridiculous, and only encourages people to get their games illegally.