Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Wheatpenny Jun 21 2007, 09:13 PM

Hey AT, dunnow if any of you check out 1up.com and have been following this story but I have and here is the links

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3160427

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3160456

But it seems that the ESRB just screwed Rockstar and the gaming populace by doleing out an AO rating for the game, know it doesen't sound like much but the problem lies in the fact that Sony,Nintendo, or Microsoft won't publish any game that gets an AO rating. If this decision is left to stand the game will not be released, sounds like no biggie now but it can only snowball from here it seems to me our chosen pastime is being demonized by politicians and the media.
Lets hope the rating gets reconsidered or else this may signal a grim future to come for freedom of expression and or speach in video games.

Posted by: Crushinator Jun 21 2007, 10:29 PM

It's not that Nintendo, Sony, or MS won't allow a game to be published thats AO, but the fact that mainstream retailers (Wal Mart, Target, EBgames) will not stock them on their shelves. That basically guarantees the game will never turn a profit, so publishers simply won't let a game get developed that will recieve and AO rating. I think so far since the inception of the IDSA ratings system back in 1995 or so, there's only been 13 AO games released across all platforms, and the "retail death" is the main reason for that. Games are still a business after all, and lets face it, Manhunt isn't really repping as the "Citizen Kane" of games if you're looking at it from a "art and freedom of speech" perspective.

They should go ahead and do what needs to be done to "sanitize" it down to a M for a retail version, then release the AO version for digital distribution (via steam/playstation network/xbox live) or as a limited online-only purchase.

Posted by: Wheatpenny Jun 22 2007, 07:58 AM

I agree that Manhunt is not exactly the posterboy game for freedom of expression but my gripe realy is that modern cinema can get a way with way more than a video game can and anytrime someone tries to push the envelope so to speak on a game and take the content to the extreme much like certian modern horror movies (take Saw for example) a game gets shot down for it.

Posted by: Crushinator Jun 22 2007, 04:41 PM

I think the big difference is in cinema you're just an observer, passive storytelling. With a game, you control the action, you make the choices, and with the wii, you even enact the motions. Its an entirely different experience, and has to be judged accordingly.

And just like the AO with games, NC-17 with films is also a "death note". Because many cinemas won't play films with a rating higher than R, you'll never turn a profit on a NC-17, so the studios cut and trim the film down to R or PG-13 to get more money.

Posted by: Wheatpenny Jun 22 2007, 05:17 PM

QUOTE(Crushinator @ Jun 22 2007, 05:41 PM)