Manhunt 2 Receives AO Rating

[Matt Young 0]

I was going to post this in CTDWAT, but I figured it is big news and there is no Manhunt 2 thread yet.

 

ESRB tags Rockstar sequel with Adults Only initial rating; Take-Two now exploring its options.

By Brendan Sinclair, GameSpot

Posted Jun 19, 2007 4:44 pm CT

 

Earlier today, the British Board of Film Classification gave Manhunt 2 a thumbs down, banning it from sale in the UK due to its "unremitting bleakness" and "casual sadism." Now it appears the Entertainment Software Rating Board is ready to hand down its own most restrictive rating to the latest controversial offering from Take-Two Interactive and Rockstar Games.

 

A Take-Two representative told GameSpot today that the ESRB has issued an initial rating of AO for Adults Only to Manhunt 2. While not an outright ban, the rating would severely limit a game's sales potential, as most major American retailers have chosen not to carry games rated AO.

 

As for the reason this is only an "initial" rating, when the ESRB rates a game, it notifies the publisher 30 days prior to publicly releasing its decision. This gives publishers unhappy with ratings the chance to either modify their games and resubmit them for a second assessment, or go before the ESRB's appeals board to challenge it directly.

 

"We believe the process of rating video games is to help people make informed entertainment choices and not to limit them," a Take-Two representative said. "Manhunt 2 was created for mature audiences and we strongly believe it should receive an M (Mature) rating, aligning it with similar content created in other forms of media. We are exploring our options with regard to the rating of Manhunt 2."

 

While Take-Two doesn't agree with the idea of an AO-rated Manhunt 2, one parent watchdog group believes it's only appropriate. Earlier today, Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood demanded that the ESRB give Manhunt 2 an AO rating, saying that "harmful effects of ultra-violent video games on children will be magnified by playing them on the interactive Nintendo Wii system."

 

The group's announcement contained a statement from Dr. Michael Rich, director of the Center on Media and Child Health at Children's Hospital Boston, who explained, "The content of Manhunt 2 and the unique physical interaction with the Wii control combine to take [the game's simulation] a level closer to reality--we can expect that the effects of this experience will be even greater."

 

The group directed like-minded individuals to contact ESRB president Patricia Vance with their concerns, and Vance today issued her response.

 

"We have received the letter from CCFC and, while we might take issue with some of the statements made within, we sincerely appreciate their expressed concerns," Vance said. "Our ratings are intended to provide guidance that allows parents to choose games they deem suitable for their children, and that is a responsibility we take extremely seriously."

 

Manhunt 2 is currently slated for a July 10 release on the PlayStation 2, PlayStation Portable, and Wii.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-------------------------------------------------------

Well shit... It's not going to make the release date.

 

If it were not for the fact that most major retailers will not carry AO games, I would be perfectly fine with them releasing it as is. But since this is indeed a business, that would not be the best idea given the cirumstances.

 

Also:

*Please note that Nintendo does not sell or license games that carry the ESRB rating "AO" (Adults Only).

 

http://www.nintendo.com/consumer/buyers_guide.jsp

[The Flamboyance 0]

Damn that's pretty crazy. This game must be really fucked up to warrant this rating. Manhunt 1 was insane. I should buy it. I rented it when it came out, got to the last boss and had to return it.

 

If the rating goes back to an M for a Wii release, then this is just another reason for me to get one. I wonder how well it could work for it. I'm not too bummed if it stays AO though. Even if it won't be as easy to find, I'd still be able to get one and would just play it on my PS2. No big deal.

[World's Worst Man 0]

It wasn't even rated by Britain's game rating board, which means it won't be sold there (unless they edit it obviously). Nintendo should change that policy though, as it doesn't help their shoddy reputation. And realistically, the difference between an M rated and AO rated game is that the AO game requires the person to be 18 as opposed to 17 for an M rated game.

 

The game itself sounds kind of over the top based on the previews I read, but I don't care what the rating is as long as it's fun.

[Matt Young 0]

There's one death move where you use some sort of pilers/clippers (can't remember exactly) to rip open a dude's sack and relieve him of his balls and spinal cord in one fell swoop, if that tells you anything.

[AndrewTS 0]

They'll edit it and resubmit. Get an M.

 

I expect testicle-chopping to stay and bare breasts/sexual content to be removed.

 

Nintendo may have that policy, but it doesn't matter. There's no way the AO rating will hold because Take-Two knows an A-O game is DOA on retail. Money will rule the day.

 

Not that Manhunt is, was, or ever will be little more than ultraviolent trash.

[The Flamboyance 0]

And realistically, the difference between an M rated and AO rated game is that the AO game requires the person to be 18 as opposed to 17 for an M rated game.

 

I dont know. I think a lot of stores in NYC won't sell you an M game even if you're 17. I remember buying an Onimusha game when I was that age and the clerk said the suggested 17 and up rating did not matter. I needed to be 18 at the time. I argued for a good few minutes and the bitch just gave up and sold it to me anyway though. I'm not sure how AO will work in these stores. 19 and up maybe? It'd be ridiculous if it's some 21 and up kinda deal.

[World's Worst Man 0]

Sounds like someone who didn't know what they were talking about. Then again, maybe it's legal for a store to make their own policies regarding what age is allowed to buy an M or AO game, assuming their policies raise the age rather than lower it.

[AndrewTS 0]

AO is 18. That clerk was just jerking you around.

 

However, the store can sell it to you no matter what age you are. The ESRB ratings are, just like film ratings, voluntary and industry-enforced. Wal-Mart doesn't carry A-O games or sell M games to minors because it's store policy. Gamestop only recently started to crack down on employees who didn't check IDs, but it was still store policy not to sell M games to anyone under 17.

 

The A-O rating is pretty much pointless because of the stance of major retailers. The big stores will not sell games that don't have an ESRB rating, because they choose not to. If you don't submit for an ESRB rating, major retailers won't carry it. If you submit and get an A-O...well, they still won't carry it. An A-O game may as well be an unrated porn game.

 

So an A-O rating does nobody any good. Chances are if you're getting that rating, it's on a hentai game that a publisher will likely slap their own content label on and sell through porn shops or secluded sections of anime/manga stores. So those don't need ESRB ratings anyway, because again, they're voluntary. If it's not one of those games...well, those are about the only places that are willing to carry it, anyway.

[Scroby 0]

Andrew your almost right here.

 

-I can't remember what year it was, but during one year (early to mid 90's) when the ESRB rating board was introduced it was said that a game can NOT be sold by any store without a rating. If a game was sold and didn't have a ESRB rating, a LOT of people would be heavily fined by it. It might have been passed as a law, this was during the whole Mortal Kombat controversy and I know very little about it, but I do know at least that much.

 

-Most retailers will not sell any game rated AO and most companys (Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo) choose not to sell games with the rating of AO.

 

So now this puts a intresting spin on Manhunt 2. Will Take-two (who already have issues with the ESRB rating board) take a good chunk of the game out to try to get it down to a M rating or will retailers and game console companys still sell the game but just take a LOT of caution with selling it. It's really a whole new ballgame now.

[dubq 0]

Meh. Personally I don't care what rating the game gets. I'm adult. I have a credit card and lots of disposable income. I know how to shop online. It's rare if I ever find myself in an actual game store browsing or buying games.

 

The thing I'm concerned about is getting the game how it was originally meant to be played. I don't want a watered down or tamer experience just for the sake of an M rating.

 

EDIT: I also had this pre-ordered through Amazon, along with RE4 since their releases were so close together. I just went in to check my order and the version of Manhunt 2 that I had ordered "is no longer available" and there is now another listing for the game that has September 1, 2007 as the release date. I'm still keeping it on pre-order just incase, but I've removed RE4 and created a separate order so I can get that sooner. Unreal...

[AndrewTS 0]

-I can't remember what year it was, but during one year (early to mid 90's) when the ESRB rating board was introduced it was said that a game can NOT be sold by any store without a rating. If a game was sold and didn't have a ESRB rating, a LOT of people would be heavily fined by it. It might have been passed as a law, this was during the whole Mortal Kombat controversy and I know very little about it, but I do know at least that much.

 

Source?

 

I know it certainly isn't that way now:

 

http://www.esrb.org/ratings/faq.jsp

 

Are all games required to have a rating?

 

The rating system is voluntary, although virtually all games that are sold at retail in the U.S. and Canada are rated by the ESRB. Many retailers, including most major chains, have policies to only stock or sell games that carry an ESRB rating, and most console manufacturers will only permit games that have been rated by ESRB to be published for their platforms.

 

And for comparison, here's a snippet from wikipedia on A-O games.

 

Critics have claimed that the ESRB will only rate games AO if they have sexual content in them, regardless of how much violence is present. Twenty three products have been given the AO rating. One was given it for unsimulated online gambling. The rest were given it for sexual content and/or nudity. One of the games with "Strong Sexual Content" as a content descriptor also had "Realistic Blood & Gore", Riana Rouge, and another one had "Violence", Critical Point. Critical Point is an eroge, and Riana Rouge has Playboy Playmates in softcore sex scenes which leads some critics to believe that these games were rated AO because of sex, not violence. Also, Fahrenheit: Indigo Prophecy Director's Cut received the AO rating. While the game contains content identical to the original North American version titled Indigo Prophecy ("Blood", "Strong Language", "Use of Drugs and Alcohol" and "Violence"), the only content which was added in the director's cut version was sex scenes with nudity, one of which was interactive. Lula 3D also contains descriptors for "Blood", "Strong Language" and "Violence" however, it also contains sexually explicit material. Much like Fahrenheit, Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas received an AO rating because interactive sex scenes were found within the game. Some critics believed that the ESRB in-house personnel may have overreacted to the attention the game received from the federal government and that the mini-game (which contained no nudity) was not explicit enough to have been re-rated. It should be noted that many adult oriented products, including erotica have actually received M ratings. However, these products are not carried by major retailers (and many are usually grouped with adult products anyway) because of the sexual content.

 

Until ESRB says otherwise, I'll continue to believe it was sexual content that got the A-O. Or maybe, *just maybe* the testicle chopping.

 

Meh. Personally I don't care what rating the game gets. I'm adult. I have a credit card and lots of disposable income. I know how to shop online. It's rare if I ever find myself in an actual game store browsing or buying games.

 

The thing I'm concerned about is getting the game how it was originally meant to be played. I don't want a watered down or tamer experience just for the sake of an M rating.

 

Industry analysts are saying whatever Take Two does, it's probably going to cost them a hell of a lot of money. They can either have the game edited and resubmit, ship as-is (not an option for the Wii version), or try to appeal the rating and bitch to the board. What's amazing is that this apparently wasn't blatantly obvious to them that the game's content would be a problem. Manhunt makes Grand Theft Auto look like Kingdom Hearts.

 

Ultimately, what these companies did to themselves is going to cost them more than anything Jack Thompson could do himself, which is hilarious.

[luke-o 0]

Nintendo should change that policy though, as it doesn't help their shoddy reputation.

 

Shoddy reputation?

 

I can't comment on this too much as in the UK we don't have an AO rating. The closest thing we have is an R18 which is used only for hardcore porn and can only be sold in licensed sex shops.

 

The BBFC are being smart here, with the backlash they got from the first game they would have been wary of this one too.

[AndrewTS 0]

Shoddy reputation?

 

As opposed to the Xboxes and PS2/PS3, where A-O games romp and play with glee everywhere you look.

 

Or not...

 

Has Sony ever made it clear what their stance is on AO games? Or MS towards AO Xbox games?

 

And GTA: SA doesn't count.

[dubq 0]

Nintendo should change that policy though, as it doesn't help their shoddy reputation.

 

Shoddy reputation?

 

 

I think he means their rep as a kiddy system.

 

Personally.. as I've said before.. I don't like being told what I can and can't see (or play in this case). I don't see why those of us who can tell the difference between right & wrong, reality & fantasy, etc. should be given something watered down because not even a handful of people blame certain events as influenced by this game (even though in the murder case in the UK it turned out that the victim, and not the perp, actually owned a copy of Manhunt (he was also underage) and that the motivation for the crime was actually robbery) or because parents can't properly monitor what their kids are consuming on a regular basis. It's bollocks, I say.

[World's Worst Man 0]

Yes, the kiddy reputation, and also not being flexible with regards to 3rd parties.

 

The AO rating isn't a big deal, but the BBFC situation is wholly unreasonable. It's their job to rate games, not tell people what they can and can't play. If not rating a game means it can't be sold, that's exactly what they're doing, and it's inarguably wrong. Given the content of the game, I can't imagine too many people trying to fight for it in the legal sense, even if its treatment is unethical.

[Scroby 0]

-I can't remember what year it was, but during one year (early to mid 90's) when the ESRB rating board was introduced it was said that a game can NOT be sold by any store without a rating. If a game was sold and didn't have a ESRB rating, a LOT of people would be heavily fined by it. It might have been passed as a law, this was during the whole Mortal Kombat controversy and I know very little about it, but I do know at least that much.

 

Source?

Me working at Gamecrazy during the whole GTA San Andreas bullshit and having to go through that whole ratings bullshit. I talked to and read a whole lot of information about game companys and what they did when it came to games and ratings during that time period. Gamecrazy and Microsoft and Sony were not playing around when that whole thing happen.

[AndrewTS 0]

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/community/person...appropriate.htm

 

Adults Only: This rating means what it says: The program or game is only for adults, meaning ages 18 and older. This is pretty straightforward. A game receives this rating if there are prolonged scenes of extremely graphic violence and/or sexual content. It is company policy that there are no AO games for Xbox® or Xbox 360.

 

Moot in this case because there's no xbox or 360 version, but it's the same as Nintendo's policy.

 

Oh, and Sony says the same thing:

 

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6172830.html

 

"It's currently our policy not to allow the playback of AO-rated content on our systems," a Sony spokesperson told GameSpot.

 

So there you have it. Either the game gets edited for content, or it doesn't come out on consoles. Not because OMG NINTENDO TEH KIDDY!!!, but because each and every major console manufacturer will not allow it.

 

Me working at Gamecrazy during the whole GTA San Andreas bullshit and having to go through that whole ratings bullshit. I talked to and read a whole lot of information about game companys and what they did when it came to games and ratings during that time period. Gamecrazy and Microsoft and Sony were not playing around when that whole thing happen.

 

Maybe that's what you were told, although I wouldn't put it past any company to lie in their marketing materials, since a lot of it is little more than propaganda. If a provision like that was altered it probably wouldn't have been forgotten about and would have gotten more coverage.

 

Passing laws that make ESRB mandatory for all games sold *and* doling out heavy fines from the state for violations are exactly what many senators and watchdog groups are proposing/lobbying for/voting on all the time. Yet the bills either don't pass or are overturned. I've never heard it mentioned that they were used before when these matters have been covered.

[AndrewTS 0]

The ultra-violent videogame Manhunt 2 allows you to rape a woman shortly after you beheaded her in the brothel level called Honey Pot. Members of the ESRB were shocked when Daniel Lamb used his male reproduction organ and simulated a penetration in the bloody hole. Other gruesome parts include microwaving a living cat to death and being a witness of necrophilia in a cemetery in one of the later stage of the game.

[devo 0]

male reproduction organ

 

Tee hee.

 

The more I hear about this game, the more glad I am that virtually nobody's going to play it (in its current form, anyway).

[Matt Young 0]

Man, fuck censorship. I want to defile headless corpses in virtual form, just so I can have people watch and totally disgust them.

[dubq 0]

If all of these companies have policies of no AO games on their consoles.. then why even have the rating to begin with? Why not just say, no we're not going to release this - tone it down. Also - it seems kind of oddly hypocritcal for SONY to have this policy seeing as they're the ones who released Eli Roth's Hostel which was a movie that people were attching the "ultra-violent" buzzword onto.

 

Regardless of whether the main character gets to "rape" a CORPSE or any other "ultra-violent" material contained within the game.. I still don't believe that it should be shelved or edited. This is no different than a gory movie except in this you're pressing some buttons that cause sprites to move around the screen. Big fucking deal. People who can't take this kind of shit just need to step aside, and oh.. how about not playing it?

 

EDIT: From Gamespot.com. This guy puts out exactly how I feel - just a little more eloquently.

 

"It's a sad state of affairs when we have to discuss the use of the Wii controller as a weapon for a game like Manhunt, but don't think twice when the game is a typical shooter game," Pachter said. "Killing is killing, and it's either acceptable or not. I think that singling out Manhunt is tantamount to discrimination against Take-Two.

 

"My personal view is that so long as consumers know what they're getting, they should be allowed to buy the game. If it is restricted to adults, so be it, but a ban is inappropriate. Adults should be able to decide for themselves whether they want to play this kind of game, and if they do, they should be allowed to purchase it."

[dubq 0]

More stuff from IGN.com

 

Rockstar Responds to Manhunt 2 Ban, AO Rating

Developer "disappointed" with BBFC's decision to reject Manhunt 2 in the UK and with the AO rating in America.

by Rob Burman and Matt Casamassina, IGN UK

 

UK, June 20, 2007 - Rockstar Games has responded to the BBFC's rejection of Manhunt 2 for certification in the UK, making sale of the game at retail illegal in this country. Rockstar states that it "emphatically disagrees" with the decision, arguing the Board failed to consider Manhunt 2's intended target adult audience.

 

"While we respect the authority of the classification board and will abide by the rules", a spokesperson for Rockstar Games stated, "we emphatically disagree with this particular decision. Manhunt 2 is an entertainment experience for fans of psychological thrillers and horror. The subject matter of this game is in line with other mainstream entertainment choices for adult consumers.

 

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

 

Both PlayStation 2 and Wii versions of Manhunt 2 have been rejected by the British Board of Film Classification on the grounds of what it considered to be its "unremitting bleakness and callousness of tone... which constantly encourages visceral killing with exceptionally little alleviation or distancing". The BBFC reviews all videogames containing gross violence, sexual or criminal activity likely to earn the game a PEGI 18+ rating. In the UK, unlike the rest of Europe, games expected to receive the PEGI 18+ grade are automatically referred to the BBFC under the Video Recordings Act.

 

Rockstar also issued a statement in response to the ESRB's recent Adults Only rating of Manhunt 2 in America.

 

"The ESRB has issued an initial rating of AO (Adults Only) for Manhunt 2.

We believe the process of rating video games is to help people make

informed entertainment choices and not to limit them. Manhunt 2 was

created for mature audiences and we strongly believe it should

receive an M (Mature) rating, aligning it with similar content created

in other forms of media. We are exploring our options with regard to

the rating of Manhunt 2."

 

Videogames which receive AO ratings by the ESRB are not carried by a number of high-profile retailers, including Wal-Mart. Also, Nintendo and Sony have in the past not licensed AO-rated titles. However, neither have yet released a statement in support or against Manhunt 2.

 

Nintendo on AO-rated Software

Uh-oh. Looks like Rockstar really needs to hit that M rating for Manhunt 2.

by Matt Casamassina

 

June 20, 2007 - Nintendo of America issued an official statement in response to the recent news that Rockstar's Manhunt 2 has received an Adults Only (AO) rating by the ESRB.

 

"Games made for Nintendo systems enjoy a broad variety of styles, genres and ratings. These are some of the reasons our Wii and Nintendo DS systems appeal to such a broad range of people. But as with books, television and movies, different content is meant for different audiences. That's why the ESRB provides ratings to help consumers understand the content of a game before they purchase it," the company said in a press statement. "As stated on Nintendo.com, Nintendo does not allow any AO-rated content on its systems."

 

So what happens if Rockstar ships without Sony's or Nintendo's "official license" - does that mean they'd probably be blackballed by the two companies? Somehow I doubt it considering the ridiculous numbers that the GTA series sells.

[World's Worst Man 0]

It'll be interesting to see how it's handled, given that it's so close to release and given Rockstar's status in the video game world. If they choose to edit it down to an M rating, it'll be significantly delayed and cost them more. If they release it as is, they would almost certainly face some consequences. If they appeal to the ESRB they'll get exactly no where. Even if they were to take it to court, that would take a while, so it really doesn't change anything. In any case, it sets a terrible precedent. There is no argument for censorship of this sort. The content is fictional, real crimes are not being committed during the making of these games, and no one is being exploited or harmed during the making of them. The whole situation is ridiculous, especially when you consider the difference in the age limit between an M and AO game is ONE YEAR. Clearly games for 17+ year olds are fine and dandy, but if it's for 18+ year olds, it deserves to be banned. It's shameful.

[AndrewTS 0]

If all of these companies have policies of no AO games on their consoles.. then why even have the rating to begin with?

 

ESRB also rates PC games, which have gotten nearly every single A-O game.

 

However, on console--yeah the rating essentially doesn't exist in any practical use. If a game gets an A-O it's a game no major retailer will sell that S/N/MS won't let get released anyway.

 

It's industry censoring itself--how the system is supposed to work, and as long as the industry feels this way this will continue to happen. But if you never play Rockstar games you'd never notice or care. Nintendo/MS/Sony are not actively lobbying the retailers to change their stance because it isn't worth it. 99.999999% of games released can fall between the E to M guidelines.

When this is over the matter will slip from the communities' minds until the next R* game comes out, or unless SNK Playmore is insane enough to try to get Doki Doki Majin Shinpan released here.

 

So what happens if Rockstar ships without Sony's or Nintendo's "official license" - does that mean they'd probably be blackballed by the two companies? Somehow I doubt it considering the ridiculous numbers that the GTA series sells.

 

At the very least Sony/Nintendo can/will file an injunction if that's done. Take-Two would never do that, though. The hardware makers have final say on anything released on their systems.

 

They could probably sue Rockstar too. What recourse does Rockstar have except to make the fringe games like this exclusive to PC?

[AndrewTS 0]

Correction--the cat in the microwave and neckhole violation and the other stuff posted above is something somebody made up on NeoGAF and it got spread around. Apologies on the misinformation, got it 2ndhand from someone else.

 

So it's back to wondering what got the A-O.

 

 

[dubq 0]

When telling him about the dead hooker sex in Manhunt 2, a buddy of mine was just replying in an email... "...in 30 seconds of the Sopranos game I beat on guy to dead with a dildo, shoved a guys face into a bandsaw (graphically), broke another ones arm and followed on screen prompts to twist the genitals of another. On a porno set. The game also includes lots of language and nudity (though it isn't that great)."

 

I'm thinking more and more that this is just a big gang up on Rockstar, given that they're the most well-known publisher of this genre of game...

[dubq 0]

Booo... from IGN.com & Gamespot.com

 

Manhunt 2 Officially Delayed

Take-Two is taking a time-out.

by Daemon Hatfield

 

June 21, 2007 - The inevitable has happened: Take-Two just issued a statement explaining the upcoming release of the currently AO-rated Manhunt 2 has been officially suspended. Originally scheduled for a July 10 release, Take-Two is reviewing its options following the UK ban earlier this week and the death sentence cast down by the Entertainment Software Ratings Board.

 

"We continue to stand behind this ordinary game," the publisher said in a statement, according to Reuters. "We believe in freedom of creative expression, as well as responsible marketing, both of which are essential to our business of making great entertainment."

 

Not only will major retailers such as Wal-Mart refuse to carry an AO-rated game, Nintendo and Sony have said they will not allow such a game to be manufactured for their consoles.

 

Take-Two shelves Manhunt 2

Plans to release game "temporarily suspended" while publisher continues exploring options.

By Brendan Sinclair, GameSpot

Posted Jun 21, 2007 3:16 pm PT

 

In the wake of international bans and an Adults Only rating in the US, Manhunt 2 won't make its July 10 release date, Take-Two Interactive has confirmed. The game had been expected to ship that day for the PlayStation 2, PlayStation Portable, and Nintendo Wii.

 

"Take-Two Interactive Software has temporarily suspended plans to distribute Manhunt 2 for the Wii or PlayStation platforms while it reviews its options with regard to the recent decisions made by the British Board of Film Classification and Entertainment Software Rating Board," a representative told GameSpot. "We continue to stand behind this extraordinary game. We believe in freedom of creative expression, as well as responsible marketing, both of which are essential to our business of making great entertainment."

 

While the ESRB's initial rating of an AO for Adults Only doesn't explicitly prohibit the game from being sold, most major US retailers refuse to carry AO games, and console manufacturers prohibit their third-party publishers from releasing AO titles on their systems.

 

I call for a PC release. I am willing to sacrifice the Wii controls for the ability to play the game in it's original form.

[AndrewTS 0]

I'm thinking more and more that this is just a big gang up on Rockstar, given that they're the most well-known developer of this genre of game...

 

Fixed. Take Two publishes their games.

 

When telling him about the dead hooker sex in Manhunt 2, a buddy of mine was just replying in an email... "...in 30 seconds of the Sopranos game I beat on guy to dead with a dildo, shoved a guys face into a bandsaw (graphically), broke another ones arm and followed on screen prompts to twist the genitals of another. On a porno set. The game also includes lots of language and nudity (though it isn't that great)."

 

Yeah, but there weren't titties in it, now was there?

[dubq 0]

I'm thinking more and more that this is just a big gang up on Rockstar, given that they're the most well-known developer of this genre of game...

 

Fixed. Take Two publishes their games.

 

oops!

 

When telling him about the dead hooker sex in Manhunt 2, a buddy of mine was just replying in an email... "...in 30 seconds of the Sopranos game I beat on guy to dead with a dildo, shoved a guys face into a bandsaw (graphically), broke another ones arm and followed on screen prompts to twist the genitals of another. On a porno set. The game also includes lots of language and nudity (though it isn't that great)."

 

Yeah, but there weren't titties in it, now was there?

 

Hey, given Sony's policy of not licensing AO games on their console. I wonder how they feel about people watching porn DVDs on the PS2 or 3?

[AndrewTS 0]

They wouldn't care, because DVD players are open platforms. You could just as easily play it on a Coby DVD player.

 

However, Sony eventually relented on their UMD anti-porn stance: http://www.wired.com/gaming/gamingreviews/news/2005/06/67759

 

Of course, that's Japan for you. And the distribution is apparently about the same as other formats of pr0n.