Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
PlayStation (Games) Entertainment Games

New Zealand Censor Bans Manhunt Outright 132

Posted by simoniker from the eye-of-sauron-upon-us dept.
rh2600 writes "The New Zealand censors have banned Rockstar Games' controversial stealth action PlayStation 2 game Manhunt, making it the 'first [ever] video game banned by the Office of Film and Literature Classification.' The New Zealand Herald has a story about it, including some pretty interesting comments from a usually liberal Censor's Office: 'Unlike the Grand Theft Auto series, which... had an element of humor in its depiction of police chases, Manhunt has none of that whatsoever.'" The censor concludes by saying: "You have to at least acquiesce in these [in-game] murders and possibly tolerate, or even move towards enjoying them, which is injurious to the public good."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New Zealand Censor Bans Manhunt Outright More

New Zealand Censor Bans Manhunt Outright

Comments Filter:

  • Riiight... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by KBV ( 732207 ) on Friday December 12, 2003 @08:18AM (#7699482) Homepage
    And this from the people who gave us Brain Dead. Great.
    • this is all bad taste anyways.
      • And having a Strapping Young Lad lyric in your post isn't?

        Just kidding, just kidding. I actually like them too.

        Anyways, if a retail chain doesn't feel like carrying the title, that's one thing. When the government bans it, that's another. The choice shouldn't be up to them. It's not right for the government to parent the young and old alike.

    • Re:Riiight... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by SmallFurryCreature ( 593017 ) on Friday December 12, 2003 @08:41AM (#7699582) Journal
      If you read the article then you can read the quote about Grandtheft Auto having the element of humor. Bad Taste and Braindead had this too. In buckets. It makes the buckets of guts acceptable. It ain't real.

      Censorship like this takes great store in the context in wich something happens. Personally I think from the reviews that Manhunter is indeed crossing the line. In most other kill games you kill to achieve a goal, not kill for the killing itself.

      Braindead has lots of killing of zombies but for the greater goal of protecting himself and his girlfriend. Manhunter has you killing to make a nice movie. A bit different don't you think?

      • If you read about the game, he kills to protect himself. And I don't see it really, it's a game. It might venture on the border between "Ok" and "Waaaaay off". But it still is only a game.
      • Censorship like this takes great store in the context in wich something happens. Personally I think from the reviews that Manhunter is indeed crossing the line. In most other kill games you kill to achieve a goal, not kill for the killing itself.

        Perhaps more people would be inclined to cry Censorship if Rockstar hadn't been flouting the violence aspect of the game to such an extent that it makes it makes all of our lives more difficult. Personally, I feel that any work that doesn't involve injury to the
        • Perhaps more people would be inclined to cry Censorship if Rockstar hadn't been flouting the violence aspect of the game to such an extent that it makes it makes all of our lives more difficult.

          How does Rockstar's "flouting" of violence ("flout" by the way means to show contempt for, or scorn but I'll pretend you used a word that means "showing off" or some such, like your use of the word "flaunt" later) make your life more difficult? Even a New Zealander's life isn't made difficult by this ruling - they

          • I believe I hod o perfectly occeptoble use of thot word.

            It gets harder and harder as a game developer to admit to your profession in the company of non-gamers if they feel (incorrectly, but nonetheless) that you're selling violence porn to children. Perhaps this doesn't matter to the average person on the street, but if you make your living with videogames this is a big deal. If you have to live with the industry's reputation day in and day out, this is a big deal.

            Rockstar is not wrong for doing what th
            • Freedom of speech generally implies a level of maturity whereby people don't shove pictures of genetalia into the face of passing parents.

              Actually, it doesn't. Freedom of speech sort of implies that there is a freedom to offend, as well. Just remember that you also have a freedom to not listen.

            • It gets harder and harder as a game developer to admit to your profession in the company of non-gamers if they feel (incorrectly, but nonetheless) that you're selling violence porn to children.

              That's like saying that a Time reporter would be ashamed to say s/he works for a magazine because Larry Flynt publishes Hustler. It's a pretty simple sentence that distances a non-Rockstar game developer from Manhunt: "I didn't develop Manhunt."

              Further, if Rockstar is the primary perpetrator when it comes to "sad

      • Manhunt has you killing to stay alive; you're being forced to participate in making "snuff" films. At least know what you're talking about first.

        BTW, the game is title "Manhunt," not "Manhunter"...

        Furthermore, if someone enjoys killing people in a *GAME*, why is that anyone else's business? Please stay the fuck out of other peoples' minds, thanks.

        Heh, have YOU ever enjoyed seeing a "badguy" die in a film or book? Don't deny it; you certainly have.

      • Although what you say is mostly true, there is a plot behind all of the madness. The main killer isn't killing to make a good movie, he is killing in order to survive, while the whole time the mastermind behind the plot is making the movie. Just thought I'd add my two cents.
    • For those not in the know, Brain Dead (aka "Dead Alive") is one of LoTR director Peter Jackson's early works. It is quite possibly the most wonderfully disgusting movies ever made, involving zombies being hacked up by a push-mower, nasty blemishes being squirted into soup, etc.

      I highly recommend it to any horror fans out there. I equally recommend "Bad Taste," which is every bit as disgusting (Peter Jackson's head is split open for half the movie, characters drinking vomit, etc.) IIRC, this is Jackson'

  • 'Unlike the Grand Theft Auto series, which... had an element of humor in its depiction of police chases, Manhunt has none of that whatsoever.'

    So as long as the hero pokes fun, or laughs when someone dies, it's bad???

    If only they added "Bad piggy, DIE!" then all would be well...
    • We're going to end up convincing all publishers to create yet more versions of of safe boring titles.

      No matter what the liberals think - trying to control people's minds doesn't work. In fact, it may even be more dangerous as those who rebel have no healthy outlet.

      (OK, the game may be sick, but it might be satisfying too.)

      I can't wait for the day when we have to sign a liability waiver to play a game....
      • No matter what the liberals think

        Funny, I thought that there were just as many on the right (especially the religious right) who are interested in censoring things.

        • Re:..it better not be at Hatians... (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Kirby ( 19886 ) on Friday December 12, 2003 @03:14PM (#7703891) Homepage
          >Funny, I thought that there were just as many on the right (especially the religious right) who are interested in censoring things.

          This is clearly true - extremists on both sides are censors, for different reasons but to the same ends.

          Not convinced that it's not the other side of the spectrum from you? I present data:

          In a list produced to mark the American Library Association's annual Banned Books week, 2002's most frequently challenged books were, with their alleged 'offence:
          The Harry Potter series, by JK Rowling - glorifying magic and wizardry.
          The Alice series by Phyllis Reynolds Naylor, - sexual content and unsuitability to its targeted age group.
          The Chocolate War by Robert Cormier - offensive language and unsuitability to age group.
          I Know Why The Caged Bird Sings by Maya Angelou, - sexual content, racism, violence and unsuitability to age group.
          Taming the Star Runner by S.E Hinton, - offensive language.
          Captain Underpants, by Dav Pilkey, - encouraging children to disobey authority.
          The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, by Mark Twain - racism, insensitivity and offensive language.
          Bridge to Terabithia, by Katherine Paterson - offensive language.
          Roll of Thunder, Hear my Cry, by Mildred D Taylor - insensitivity, racism and offensive language.
          Julie of Wolves, by Jean Craighead George - sexual content, offensive language and violence.

          Harry Potter is clearly a right-wing protest, as well as most of the sex and bad word complaints. Huck Finn is clearly a left-wing protest, as well as most of the insensitivity and racism complaints.

          This problem doesn't come from the classic American political spectrum. It's more on an individual rights vs. community standards axis. The techie crowd skews strongly towards individual rights, but it seems like the general popluation in most countries is more towards community standards.

          (Personally, I'm not a big fan of censorship, either for these games or these books, but anyone blaming the Left or the Right is just not paying any attention.)
          • I plan to make my kids read all those books, save Harry Potter because that series is a complete waste of time. A problem that exists with censorship is that it just represses tough issues people don't want to deal with. God forbid people be proactive and actually get involved with their children to contextualize situations. Stop using TV and Video Games as a babysitter and experience the world with your children.
            • Even better - experience this with your children.

              Prepare them for the REAL WORLD. It's not a nice place - the underdog doesn't always win.

              The most important thing is that my kids won't be surprised and they'll know when to duck.

              That's something I want games to prepare them for.

              Res up the carrier....
    • Its not a question of if the hero pokes fun, but that the tone of the piece is completely different.

      GTA has always been at pains to be sufficiently silly that the violence takes place in a cartoon world; even the most nasty thing you could do is not on the scale of the kind of things that Itchy and Scratchy get up to, and is taken about as seriously. Manhunt, however, revels in sadism for its own sake. The whole aim of the game is to be as vindictively cruel in your violence as possible.

  • Australia (Score:4, Interesting)

    by shione ( 666388 ) on Friday December 12, 2003 @08:23AM (#7699508) Journal
    I wonder how the OLFC in Australia will decide.

    They made Rockstar censor GTA3 and VC and both games came out in NZ uncut.

  • Order it online (Score:5, Insightful)

    by a.koepke ( 688359 ) on Friday December 12, 2003 @08:26AM (#7699522)
    Yeah they may have banned it for sale there but how is it going to stop people ordering it online?

    I used to have a game that was banned over here in Australia, was easy to buy over the internet and have them send it over. Also makes me wonder if it will be banned here in Australia at all?

    But on a different note, doesn't sound like the sorta game I would like to play. I play GTA Vice City a bit and thats good fun but this... I think not. Yeah in GTA you kill people (which is still fun) but its not the aim of the game. Also seeing someone fall over and there being a bit of blood is a lot different to seeing the victim's mouth gasping for air inside the bag you suffocate them with. The latter is, IMO, bordering on perverse.
    • It wont. But if customs spot it in the random packages they check, they'll confiscate it.
    • (Disclaimer: haven't played it)

      Ya, it *does* seem a bit over the line. GTA was fun because you could do whatever you wanted to in any given city; being forced to execute people in photo-realisic glory is somewhat scary. No way in hell kids under 18 should play this game; hell, I doubt *anybody* should. Perhaps games like this just shouldn't have been made?

      • Re:Order it online (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Acidic_Diarrhea ( 641390 ) on Friday December 12, 2003 @10:47AM (#7700402) Homepage Journal
        Given that you haven't even played the game and you've decided that no one should play it - what is your basis? The fact that there is photo-realistic violence? Do you support the idea that no one should see movies like Halloween or the Silence of the Lambs? Both clearly have photo realistic violence and are not intended to be taken in any sort of humorous way. You could argue that in movies, it is a passive medium and in a video game, you have control over what the character does.

        But since you haven't played the game, that argument doesn't hold any water. You don't know how one interacts and at what level the interaction is. Before you go deciding that no one should be playing violent games, maybe you should do a little research and find out if there's ever been a link established between violent games and deviant behavior.

        Sure, if Manhunt isn't your cup of tea, don't buy it. But rather than trying to judge whether anyone should be playing it or whether it should have been made, why not just let the free market determine the best route? [Since you're not going to prove a link between violent games and violent behavior in people who weren't already prone to such behavior.] If no one buys games that, in your opinion, shouldn't have been made, games like this won't be made.

        I live in the United States where freedom of speech is a right - this includes violent video games.

        • In Silence of the Lambs, you're supposed to identify with Jodie Foster's character. In this game, it sounds like you're supposed to identify with the guy wearing the human skin suit. Big difference. Really big difference. It's true that somebody who's got some issues might identify with one of the psychopaths in Silence, but that's different than being in a situation where your only choice is to identify with Mr. Skinsuit.
          • Okay then, use the Red Dragon. I didn't see the film but I read the book. Starling's character in that book allows Lecter to go on the loose and commit murder. She is an accessory at best. And there's a romance that blossoms between Starling and Lecter. Given your premise that we're supposed to identify with Starling - she's a murderer in that chronicle. Still a big difference?

            If that doesn't suit you, I was trying to stay close to the original comment, I can dig up other popular films where the main charac

            • Okay then, use the Red Dragon. I didn't see the film but I read the book. Starling's character in that book allows Lecter to go on the loose and commit murder. She is an accessory at best. And there's a romance that blossoms between Starling and Lecter. Given your premise that we're supposed to identify with Starling - she's a murderer in that chronicle. Still a big difference?

              I didn't see Red Dragon, so I can't really comment in depth. But again, I think the degree of identification is different - in th

              • Alright, I'll mostly agree with what you've said. I don't know if there's a link between video games and becoming a worse person, as you put it. All I know is that I do not believe these types of games/movies/music/books do not have an effect on me that would make me loose my grip on reality or start to believe that murder is an appropriate means to an end.

                I agree that there should be a reaction and I think it's already happened in the form of the ESRB. People can see what type of game they're getting into

                • You see what I'm saying?

                  I pretty much agree with what you're saying, except that I think that some intervention (I agree government intervention is a slippery slope, so I'm not suggesting that) is worthwhile.

                  I don't think playing Manhunt is going to turn you into a psychopath. But what I do believe it will do is to desensitize you to this sort of violence. It will make you maybe 10% less able to be compassionate towards others. It will maybe reduce your impulse control a little. In your life, thi

                  • Re: American Psycho: There is no way in hell the maker's of that film intended the viewer to "identify" with Patrick Bateman. The entirety of the film is an exercise in alienation for the purpose of satire.

                    Difference between games and movies: In movies, it is indubitably not you doing the doings. In games it simultaneously> you and not you doing the doings.

                    In this light, what disturbs about Manhunt is the absolute lack of choice. Max Payne pulled a similar trick by confronting the player with his

            • One point about your America Psycho comment that differentiates it, I think, from Manhunt/games in general. By reading (or watching)AP you are passively observing Batemans actions, so you're making moral observations throughout, but you aren't involved. Manhunt puts you in the position to actually carry out these acts, so now you are directly involved. And American Psycho is another piece of 'entertainment' that really need not exist. Easton Ellis I believe says there is some point he was trying to make, do

        • Re:Order it online (Score:2, Interesting)

          by Txiasaeia ( 581598 )
          We meet again, Acidic Diarrhea. (devilish laugh) You also live in a country where peodiphiles can write about thirteen year old girls in sexual situations and have it protected by free speech. You live in a country where people can write about snuff fantasies and it's protected by free speech. Maybe US-style free speech is just a little fucked up?

          I liked Silence of the Lambs; it wasn't about gratuitous murder. You say that movies are a "passive" medium, and that's exactly why the movies that you descri

          • but do you support the right of a ten year old playing this game?

            What difference does it make to me? It's his or her parents responsibility to decide that. Not yours, not mine, and certainly not your or my government's.
          • You say Manhunt shouldn't exist but then ask me whether a 10 year old should be playing Manhunt. There's a big difference between limiting who can buy a game and removing a game completely from store shelves. I think most adults are mature enough people to enjoy a violent video game and not lose their marbles over it. Likewise, I'm not endorsing letting children play these games. I haven't played Manhunt so I don't know if the ESRB should have rated it Adults Only. I'm sure it deserved the Mature label at l
            • I haven't played Manhunt so I don't know if the ESRB should have rated it Adults Only. I'm sure it deserved the Mature label at least, which it got.

              I have played it. AO or M is a tough call. The ESRB said M, others say AO should have been given. But due to some of the violence, I say it really is tough to call.

              The thing is, it all depends on how you kill the people that determines how graphic the scene is. The longer you hold the button, the more graphic the scene (a target indicator goes from gray

              • I've played the game as well. It's far from what I'd call a fun game, though it was interesting for about half an hour. My wife hated it, and requested several times that I turn it off. It's quite graphic, and the atmosphere is such that the game feels violent, dirty, and criminal. It's not something you'd watch and laugh at, like you might with Grand Theft Auto.

                The only saving grace is that the game is somewhat of a "Running Man" scenario, where you are placed in a sealed off section of city with a b

                • You are innocent, they are cold blooded killers.

                  I would disagree with this part. Your character is, after all, a convicted multi-murderer and was sentenced to death by lethal injection. And he seems to be able to kill in the most grisly ways without a second thought in the game as well.

                  Hardly innocent by any stretch of the imagination.

                  The kill or be killed motto only goes so far. I would assume that put in the same situation, most normal people would throw their guts up after the first kill (and t

                  • Well, my recollection of the game could be somewhat wrong. I played it over the Thanksgiving holidays, so that's almost a month ago. I don't know that I watched the intro movies either, or maybe I just didn't pay attention.

                    Either way, I was fairly shocked by the content, and I consider myself pretty unshockable. I think I played through the first three levels or so then got bored with it. Shocking only goes so far, and I thought that the controls made executions overly difficult.

                    • Either way, I was fairly shocked by the content, and I consider myself pretty unshockable.

                      I wasn't shocked, really. Some of the violent kills made me go 'ew' for half a second, but not shocking.

                      I think I played through the first three levels or so then got bored with it. Shocking only goes so far, and I thought that the controls made executions overly difficult.

                      100% agree. In fact, we made it to around the same area, it sounds, before we both got bored of it.

            • "So which are you supporting? Removing the game from store shelves completely or preventing children from gaining access to it?"

              There was a discussion a while ago on /. about this topic - I agreed with the idea that adult/mature vid games should be kept in a back room, a la porn at the local video store. No sight, no access. If a kid decides to pirate a game, well, nobody except his parents can do anything about that.

              Beyond that, I also think that advertisements for such games should be severely lim

              • Guantanimo Bay is holding prisoners of war. They are not afforded the same rights that a U.S. citizen is. Honestly, after you said that I really couldn't take much of everything else you said seriously. All the people currently being detained there didn't say something to get there - they were actively fighting against our troops in a fucking war.

                And what's your bit about hate crimes?

                • Hate crimes - you're not allowed to write, say, or do anything that discriminates against another person. Don't you think that this goes against your whole "freedom of speech" idea?

                  Let's talk about Maher Arar for a second. He is a Canadian citizen who travelled into the US on a Canadian passport. Without any due process or notification, he was deported to Syria where he was tortured for a year. Why? Because the US suspected he was a terrorist. They didn't have any proof at all. Let me remind you th

                  • Actually, you obviously don't know anything about hate crime legislation in the United States. I can say whatever I want concerning my dislike for a particular group. What hate crime legislation is used for is if I commit a crime against a group of people, the penalty can be more strict. You actually think United States citizens can't write, say or do anything that discriminates against another person? Again, have you seen the Ku Klux Klan organize and have marches? I know that they have had marches and hav
                    • Re: hate speech - I have no idea what the heck I was talking about (I was probably thinking about a case in Ontario where a professor was being brought up on criminal charges for hate speech), but I can't find anything that supports my earlier claim that hate speech in the US is a crime; it's protected by the First Amendment, right?

                      The thing that disturbs me is how much the US has changed since 9/11. Let me give you an example: my mom's American, and her relatives live in Oregon (my parents live in BC).

            • Acidic, if I had mod points I'd be giving you one right now. Your argument in favor of free speech was superb, before reading your post I was about to respond but was having difficulty articulating the point, excellent job.
          • ". I can sit in my seat and absolutely hate everything that Lecter does, but when I'm playing a game where I'm forced to decapitate, strangle, and brutalise other individuals, then I have no choice but to become involved in that world.
            "

            Forced? I didn't realize Rockstar Games had a feature that forced you to play this game. If the theme of the game is something you want to part of then by all means don't play it. Done and done, Parents are the end all be all of this. If they do not want there kids playing t
            • If you choose to play the game then you're forced to murder. I agree that it's up to parents - if they would watch the games that their kids play, then there might not be any need for gov't regulation.
              • Going through all the comments in this thread, there's one important point missing from the discussion.

                In many films and other literature about ruthless murderers, they murder innocents. The people they kill are killed for no reason. Hannibal Lecter didn't kill people in self defense. In Manhunt, you are forced to kill people. That's the whole plot of the game. Your character is already a murderer who was about to be executed, but instead your execution was faked and you were handed over to a man (for a pr
                • "It's important to look at the game within its narrative context, otherwise all the discussion is pointless."

                  Not necessarily; you can choose to object to the whole narrative too. If I created a video game where the player had to rape as many little girls as possible, but only because s/he would be raped if they didn't, would that make it an acceptable game?

                  • Acceptable to whom? Should it be acceptable that you even mention the rape of little girls? Some people might be offended or disturbed just by the mention of it. That example is ridiculous anyway. There's a difference between killing someone who would kill you if you didn't and raping an innocent person to prevent yourself from being raped by someone else.

                    Objecting to the narrative isn't the same as forcing the narrative to not exist. However, you can't object to things within the game outside the context
                    • "But if you actively pursue activities to prevent other people from making things available that I might enjoy because you think your morals are the standard by which all others should live, then you're just an asshole."

                      I was going to agree with you all the way until the "asshole" bit :) I don't try to stop people from playing anything; I don't know where you got that impression. I'd like to stop kids from playing games like this, but I'm not about to go out and join some sort of organisation to do so.

                    • I don't try to stop people from playing anything; I don't know where you got that impression.

                      It wasn't directed at you, it was just a general statement. And it's not really about stopping people from playing the game. If you want to discourage people from playing it, that's your business. But I draw the line at lobbying governments for the purpose of passing legislation that would make the creation and distribution of these types of games illegal. Again, not saying you do that.

                      I'm in favor of more dilige
                • Hannibal Lecter is a poor example though, through his paradigm the people he killed were not innocent they had offended him in someway. Lecter is a social deviant for sure, but he doesn't just kill people. Every person he kills in some way wrongs him or others, in many respects he is a vigilante. If you don't agree, go watch the three movies again and look at the relationship his character builds with Clarise, why do you think he cuts his own hand off at the end of Hannibal as opposed to hers?
                  • Well, nearly all killings have some justification, whether real or imagined. I guess that wasn't really my point.

                    My point was that if I tell you I beat someone to death with a baseball bat, you might be pretty horrified. But if I tell you right before that he was running at me full speed, swinging a bloody knife, and screaming how he was going to gut me, then you probably understand why I did it.

                    P.S. I've never seen any of the Silence of the Lambs movies nor have I read the books. I'm only familiar with t
              • "If you choose to play the game then you're forced to murder"

                I can name a ton of games where you "Murder" albiet they may not have it as graphic as in this POS game.
        • I don't advocate the censorship of Manhunt, but Manhunt is a crime against gaming by Rockstar. Manhunt contributes nothing to gaming, and gives Lion and Lamb type people ammunition, as Manhunt has no redeeming qualities. It's violence for violence sake, wrapped in a uninspired boring game. GTA had a sense of humor, almost cartoonish violence, and a fresh way of progressing through a game world. Manhunt is Rockstar arrogantly saying 'Hey we can sell any POS based on our brand, violence, and controversy', sad

          • Re:Order it online (Score:4, Insightful)

            by dev0n ( 313063 ) on Friday December 12, 2003 @01:20PM (#7702429) Homepage
            Agreed. It's a disgrace that this game is being censored, but I also believe that it's a disgrace that it was even created in the first place.

            I realize that violence sells, but you'd think that the folks making these games would try to direct the powers of their talents in a much less horrific direction. I'm not saying that there shouldn't be violence in games, but to make it the focus, the goal, the reason that the game exists? It just seems wrong and sad to me.
            • No, you would think that. I would not. Clearly, this game is not made for you. Isn't it wonderful that no one will force you to buy or play it?

              I think it would be just as wonderful if you bit your lip instead of spouting your self-righteous moral judgments about a game that some people want to play.,

          • It's so amazing to me that you reached all those (inane) conclusions without every playing the game or even seeing anyone play the game.

            I would like to gently suggest that you shut your stupid pie hole until you have some experience with the game in question.

            Thank you in advance for your cooperation, you annoying fuckwitted asshat censorship-mongering moron.
            • I've played it, and had I not I'd probably not be posting here at all. My biggest problem with it (after playing it) is they've used extreme violence to sell an incredibly shallow, repetitive, and overall boring game.
    • Oh, well thank YOU mr. moral majority. While you're at it, why not make a list of perversities that you find offensive and we'll just go right ahead and make it all illegal. Listen up old biddies. There's GOOD ART and there's BAD ART. There's no "immoral art', only "immoral actions". Only in the twisted mind of easily offended and truly shallow can ART and ACTIONS be confused. I advise you to take some ethics of art classes.
      • Arts may not have moral valuation, but it is undeniable that it has a political valence. My above post (apology for the italics) is an attempt to point out the way that Manhunt goes about making itself into a "statement" about voyeurism, and simultaneously erases all serious consideration. In that sense, it encourages false conciousness. Therefore, politically considered, it is bad art.
        • Manhunt's political valence is amost a total non-issue (not completely, I'll get to that).

          This isn't public policy Rock* is selling, it's entertainment meant strictly for adults. Pornography (or killography as some pinhead pundits have recently invented) isn't selling a statement on the plight of women in a male dominated industry, its selling lines,curves and semen and explosions. It takes a pundit or a politician to take that entertainment and make bad law and bad analysis.

          Manhunt DOES have political v

  • With all the censoring going on I wonder if I should go out and buy this game and Vice City now while I still can and then sell them on eBay in a few years for a few $100 dollars each..
  • .... of people doing things "for the good of the public"....
  • it will save the people from playing a crappy gimmick game, kinda like how Acclaim stopped making games for the gamecube.. they are doing us a favor.

  • Great (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Blublu ( 647618 ) on Friday December 12, 2003 @10:44AM (#7700379) Journal
    The game will now be infinitely more interesting to teenagers.
  • Sure sounds like "ManHunt" is a nasty and revolting game. I'm not against vidgame violence, but I'd rather not see this one succeed.

    But does censorship decreases sales? Yes, NZ retail won't carry it. Will that stop online shippers, travellers or purchasers in other countries? "Banned in NZ" might well be a powerful reason for some to buy it.

    • Sure sounds like "ManHunt" is a nasty and revolting game. I'm not against vidgame violence, but I'd rather not see this one succeed.

      If you'd rather not see this game succeed, don't buy it. No government has the right to control what people say, hear, or think... I don't care what anybody says. Rights are given to people simply by the fact that we all have free-will, whether you believe that comes from God, or from billions of years of evolution, you can't deny that humankind is the only species we know o
      • Oh, I agree. I won't be buying it, but I agree that censorship is profoundly immoral.

        Censors impose their free-will to reduce their subjects free-will. I met and listened to a censor once. I had a strong urge to wash my hands afterwards.

        My point is that irrespective of morality, censorship may be counter-productive by enoucraging more "forbidden fruit" sales than it reduces by depriving retail channels.

        Oh, about the speciesism -- I don't know that humans supress their instincts more than others. Many

    • Awww. Panties in a twist? Learn to appreciate GOOD art and BAD art. you'll find that you're "revolted" less and "entertained" more. Only in the twisted mind of a moral simpleton can art and action be confused.
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Yeah, this game is like a gift to those that want to see games censored. And it's not the graphics that make it appalling('cause like all Rockstar titles, save MP, it looks like ass) it's the presentation, the lack of a story, and those filters that leave more to your imagination because the killing is kinda blurred. The whole thing just feels wrong. Rockstar probably couldn't outdo themselves here, except maybe releasing Manhunt 2: Rape and Kill (get and extra star for vaginal tears).

  • Excuse me? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by floydigus ( 415917 ) on Friday December 12, 2003 @12:30PM (#7701741)
    "a usually liberal Censor's Office"

    They ban one game and their not liberal any more?
    • Personally, I found the concept of *any* "Censor's Office" being "liberal" rather odd. "Liberal" to me means not having a "Censor's Office" at all...

      Chris Mattern
  • http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi? havc

    Get humans censored out of Vice City!
  • I'll order my copy tomorrow!

    As will thousands of other people when they read this news.
  • This game sounds like a groundbreaking new system for tracking potential violent offenders. Conspiracy theorists should start checking out where Rockstar got its advance for this project right about now... ;-)
  • Too many people are confusing seperate issues here: (1) censorship and (2) game ratings. Lets toss the 2nd out the window. If a game is properly designated under a rating system then only the parents are to blame if a 10-year old is playing an ultra-violent game. Adults can do whatever they want. If attending a KKK or neo-nazi meeting isn't illegal than how can playing a game be? As for the first issue (censorship) I have two thoughts- its wrong! (Pbbbbbt!) and in the situations where a commercial prod
  • They were filming one of my martial arts instructors demonstrating and talking through kali knife fighting techniques. They definitely wanted bloody techniques, like disembowelments, not just efficient techniques. I wonder if this was the game? PS -- Before somebody flames me, Kali knife techniques are very brutal, as are all realistic knife fighting techinques. Still, some are bloodier than others.
  • Lets face the facts here, granted Manhunt may be one of the most bloodiest games ever made but its not the only one of its kind. Maybe everyone should think back to the early to mid ninties when the infamous orginial Mortal Kombat came out, it was the most gruesome game of its time and look how well it did and is still doing. I agree with all the other /.'ers who say if you dont like the game dont by it. No one can force it apon you and no one wants to hear anyone bitching about it either. There is al
    • As I recall, MK was limited to 16-bit graphics and had characters spewing ice shards from their wrists. Manhunt sounds like it's aiming for photorealism and the sense that, "Hey, you could do this in real life, too."

  • Sure this is Rockstar? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Guppy06 ( 410832 ) on Friday December 12, 2003 @08:13PM (#7707283)
    I would have thought adding a "Banned in New Zealand!" sticker to a game's case is a marketing tactic more up Acclaim's alley.

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close