US Senators Take On The ESRB Over Manhunt 2 386
eldavojohn writes "Some US Senate members sent a letter to the ESRB asking for 'your consideration of whether it is time to review the robustness, reliability and repeatability of your ratings process, particularly for this genre of 'ultraviolent' video games and the advances in game controllers,' the senators wrote. 'We have consistently urged parents to pay attention to the ESRB rating system. We must ensure that parents can rely on the consistency and accuracy of those ratings.' The group of lawmakers were concerned that Manhunt 2 was only given an 'M' rating and instead feel that it should have the 'AO' rating — a rating that only 23 other games have been given and a rating that would cause Sony & Nintendo to restrict it from being released on their consoles."
Did they actually play it? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This whole Manhunt 2 issue sounds like Wacko Jacko Thompson ass-hattery. These senators need to spend more time on the bigger issues than a damn game. The game is rated M for Mature; it's very similar to movie R ratings. If it's not already law, the stores should make it a policy to not sell M rated games and R rated movies
Re:Did they actually play it? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The congressional hearings and demands in this area disturb me since it's a "natural" progression of events which could wind up getting an official government agency overwatching content.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Did they actually play it? (Score:5, Insightful)
But wait, the movie and TV industries have better lobbyists, and the "think-of-the-children" nanny-voters this panders to aren't gamers (but they do watch CSI and movies).
Re:Did they actually play it? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Did they actually play it? (Score:5, Insightful)
-mcgrew
Re:Did they actually play it? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Did they actually play it? (Score:4, Interesting)
Funny how this instantly devolved into name-calling along party lines.
I agree with you and whoever started this thread... it would be awesome if our senators could focus on public policy and not parenting.
Sadly, the right is slaved to a series of moral crusades by it's religious base, and the left is slaved to a series of Orwellian crusades against Fair Use by it's Hollywood backers. Neither side is good for you if you just want to play video games and listen to your music on any device you want.
But the lines aren't really that clear cut. Witness Hillary's historically anti-video-game stance and Tipper Gore's moral crusades against violent lyrics. But it's a formula in politics... create a controversy out of something that isn't, act really flustered and appalled, hold a bunch of hearings, enact some 900 page law that solves nothing (but handily doles out billions for new bridges/dams/roads/pet project of the month), then wait until everyone forgets and dredge it up again.
Re:Did they actually play it? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Did they actually play it? (Score:5, Funny)
That's the bit that gets me, the console makers. (Score:5, Insightful)
There are people making the games, there are people that want to play the games, why not just let the rating system rate them and let people choose to play them or not?
Then there wouldn't be so much pressure to get a game in under the M rating, the ESRB wouldn't be under so much pressure not to give out AO ratings (which are an effective ban at present), and parents would have a fairer idea of what is suitable for little Jimmy and what really is not.
Sony and Nintendo are the problem in this scenario.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:That's the bit that gets me, the console makers (Score:5, Insightful)
Face it: The average American consumer is a frothy-mouthed puritan.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Face it: The average American consumer is a frothy-mouthed puritan."
Except that Manhunt2 is baned in the UK... And not just rated AO. Also in the US the games ratings don't carry the force of law like they do in the UK.
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2007/06/19/manhunt_2_banned/ [reghardware.co.uk]
Yeah, god bless the UK (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd take console manufacturer censorship over government censorship any day.
Re:That's the bit that gets me, the console makers (Score:5, Insightful)
Because of the inversion of pronography and violence being the hot-button issues in Europe and America. In America, the highest ratings imply pornography (which Nintendo and Sony don't want to be associated with... cue Betamax). In Europe (generalizing becuase I have never been to England), typically nudity is more acceptable than violence.
So, to answer your question, Sony and Nintendo are fine being associated with violence (Nintendo typically cartoon), but not pornography. So, to make up for the fact that people rarely learn why the ratings are the way they are, anything with a pornographic sounding rating is a no-no.
Really, blame the American consumer or ESRB for not having a Violence/Sexuality/Language/Choose a few more categories complex rating and not a simple categorization.
Re:That's the bit that gets me, the console makers (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:That's the bit that gets me, the console makers (Score:5, Funny)
They even have trolls and all, and sometimes I wonder if Cynthia McKinney is a closet member of the GNAA...
Re: (Score:2)
Do you really need to ask why? Political grandstanding leading up to the next election comes to mind.
Most voters don't want to think about war, don't want to think about rendition, civil rights, the economy, etc. It's easier to vote based on the gut feeling that "so-and-so's v
Re:That's the bit that gets me, the console makers (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Sadly, that bill sounds about as well thought out as 99% of the shit they pass.
Zappa (Score:5, Insightful)
"I would say that a buzz saw blade between the guy's legs on the album cover is good indication that it's not for little Johnny."
With a title like "Manhunt 2", perhaps the game isn't for little Jimmy.
Re:That's the bit that gets me, the console makers (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
But some retailers (especially online) would still carry it. It's the console manufacturers that knock it stone dead.
That's the whole reason why there is a problem (Score:5, Insightful)
I mean have a look at unrated movies. American Pie received an R rating in the theatrical version. However the theatrical version was not the cut the director originally wanted. So that was released later, but just not submitted for rating. Ok please, let's not be morons here, it's rating would be NC-17. The only reason they go back and make cuts like that is if they couldn't get the rating they wanted with the original. In the case of an R movie, that mean an NC-17 was what was going to be hung on the original cut.
Well they can't release it with that rating, nobody will carry it, so instead they just release it "unrated".
Same shit with videogames. For whatever reason, AO is assumed to mean a horrible porno and thus nobody will touch it. You get that hung on your game, you have to change it if you ever want widespread sales. Otherwise no console license, no distribution in almost every major retailer and so on. It's an additional problem with games because you essentially can't release unrated, stores just refuse to carry games that don't feature a rating. Doesn't necessarily have to be ESRB, some games rate with PEGI instead (Civ 4) but if it isn't rated, expect nobody to stock it.
The problem isn't Nintendo and Sony, the problem is this overall cultural idea that the highest rating = something really bad. The problem is that people need to understand that just because something has the highest rating doesn't mean it should be shunned from the light, it just means it is something not for kids. However currently that just does not seem to be the case. If you game can't make an M rating, people think it is too evil to be distributed.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I mean have a look at unrated movies. American Pie received an R rating in the theatrical version. However the theatrical version was not the cut the director originally wanted. So that was released later, but just not submitted for rating. Ok please, let's not be morons here, it's rating would be NC-17. The only reason they go back and make cuts like that is if they couldn't get the rating they wanted with the original. In the case of an R movie, that mean an NC-17 was what was going to be hung on the original cut.
That might have been the case with "American Pie" specifically, but increasingly movies are being released as "special unrated versions" that don't actually contain any particularly shocking or objectionable material - they just stick in a few extra minutes of innocuous stuff that was edited out of the original (usually for time purposes) and try to pass it off as "the unrated version that the censors didn't want you to see!" or similar nonsense. Of course, by the time you realize that there's nothing subs
Re:That's the whole reason why there is a problem (Score:5, Insightful)
*I* will decide what is for my kids thank you very much.
I am all for rating systems. They give information to otherwise ignorant people. If I've never played a game or seen a movie personally the rating system, along with the description of the media on the package, gives me information that will help me understand what kind of content it features. That provides me with information which leads to making informed choices which is a good thing.
However, under no circumstance am I ok with people telling me what is "ok" and what is "not ok" for my children. That's my job. That's one of the reasons that I wish rating systems wouldn't use titles like "T for Teen" and "M for mature". It implies that you need to be a certain age to play it and it doesn't really tell you what the content is. Sure you can guess that if something is "M" it probably has either course language, violence, nudity or all of the above but I, as a parent, will decide how much profanity, course language, violence, sex and drugs is acceptable for my children. Not some board of strangers who are trying to impose their moral opinions on our other strangers.
That is one of the biggest problems IMO. All of the "think of the children" hysteria. It's becoming cliche on
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Whatever kids see independent of their parents are also independent of rating systems (with the exception being if it's another adult presenting the media such as a teacher or other parent but I would expect those situations to still involve the parent. IE: if you object to another parent's methods you wouldn't have that parent babysitting your child etc.).
My position is that rating systems should be about allowing people to make informed choices
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I would posit that "horrible porno" is an oxymoron.
-mcgrew
The obvious solution (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Which is ironic considering that one of the ideas behind NC-17 was to distinguish "adult" from "porn".
Re:That's the bit that gets me, the console makers (Score:2)
Because they remember Fredric Wertham [wikipedia.org]. And they figure the PR will be better, and the censorship milder, if they can keep under their control, which can only happen as long as Congress feels they're doing a minimally acceptable job of it.
Chris Mattern
Re: (Score:2)
And Jack Thompson.
Re:That's the bit that gets me, the console makers (Score:4, Interesting)
The standard needs to be neutral and immune to market pressure, or it isn't much use to anyone.
This reeks of someone at the ESRB being bought to me. The games content certainly feels like adult material. I wouldn't like to think of my kid-brother, at 16, playing it. He's nowhere near mature enough. The 'AO' standard really is a better fit for this particular title, unless they have made some changes that I'm not aware of...
As far as I can see, the ONLY reason that it got released as an 'M' title is that the market for 'M' far exceeds that of 'AO'. The content didn't have much of anything to do with the determination.
In that light, those Senators are correct in expressing concern.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
For the record, I feel the minimum age of adulthood really should be something like 21, especially since college has evolved into 'High School Second Edition'. That means no voting, no joining the military, no getting married, no ZERO CREDIT CREDIT CARDS, etc. If you're not old enough to maturely handle alcohol consumption, I don't want you choosing which targets are friendly nor choosing what kind of political issu
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
What the hell, why not just make it 30? 35? How about 40? You seem
Re:That's the bit that gets me, the console makers (Score:3, Insightful)
Frankly, I don't see the purpose of the "AO" rating at all. As far as I understand it, the "M" rating means it has mature content, and parents are basically being advised not to let their kids play those games. If the ESRB's purpose is to make consumers aware of the game's content, then "M" should be a sufficient rating to let people know it's an adult game.
So why have the AO rating at all? AFAICT the purpose is twofold. First, it's an attempt to give an excuse for the fact that children are playing ra
I don't believe that though (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I know there are loads of 20-somethings playing video games, and I'm certainly not one of those people who believe that adult games shouldn't be allowed. On the other hand, let's not pretend that there are a lot of kids playing GTA.
My point is that, if parents are paying attention to the games that their kids are playing, the "M" rating should be sufficient to warn them that it contains adult subject matter. Beyond that, the parents are responsible for investigating the game in order to determine whether
Re: (Score:2)
OTOH, I do think there wasa qualitative difference between GTA and Manhunt. If I had teenage kids over about 13 I'd be happy (not saying everyone would be) for them to play something like GTA. I'd probably give it another couple of years before Manhunt...
I don't kno0w, I'm not that familiar with the rest of the US ratingsystem so it would be difficult for me to say AO is needed when there might already be a perfectly goo
Re: (Score:2)
OTOH, I do think there wasa qualitative difference between GTA and Manhunt. If I had teenage kids over about 13 I'd be happy (not saying everyone would be) for them to play something like GTA. I'd probably give it another couple of years before Manhunt...
I'd agree with that, but I don't think they need two different ratings. I think both should be rated "mature", and parents should be reviewing the content of any game rated "mature" before giving it to their kids.
Re: (Score:2)
How about this: (Score:2)
It's like their investigation into steroids in baseball. Who gives a crap? It's fricken baseball!
Stop wasting my money and time and get back to work!
Re: (Score:2)
Speaking of Fritz, a few years ago when I was on Paxil, Springfield [illinoistimes.com] was full of of cartoons [kuro5hin.org] and I met the skinny crow woman from Fritz the Cat [kuro5hin.org] (her name's Ginger). Twice! [kuro5hin.org]
I lost both
Re: (Score:2)
More importantly, let's give props to Microsoft (yes, I know its /.) for doing something right and letting the gamer decide what to play on their console! Sun even shines on a dog's ---ESRB LABELED POST AO, Slashdot has truncated---
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't say "prohibited", It's the games companies doing it, not the government.
laws and videogames are a success story (Score:5, Interesting)
Most Laws Attempting Limits of Violent Videogames Fail [slashdot.org]
i'm not saying stop being vigilant. i'm saying, stop being grumpy. this is a ray of light here
Re: (Score:2)
Not a bad point, but this letter has an underlying tone of extortion to me. It's "please rethink your ranking system [or else we'll rethink it for you]."
Maybe I'm just being a grumpy pessimist, but if they're not considering making a law, then why are lawmakers writing letters, hm?
the beauty of the system (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
i'm just trying (Score:2)
if you are going to insist on being a pessimist, i can't help you, and frankly, i would call you stupid for not celebrating when the cause to celebrate is clearly before you
The shame.... (Score:2)
Don't they have better things to do than to nitpick about video game ratings? Or would doing those things require the intestinal fortitude to look at a real problem and come up with a real solution, which is far beyond what they're capable of?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Air force pilots have a saying which keeps them alive:
"Fight the most immediate threat".
It's a survival thing, you know?
Just because a couple dozen grandmothers are upset because their 17 year old (but oh god I remember when he was just 4 doesn't time go by so fast he's still my innocent little baby) plays a violent game, doesn't mean that it's an IMPORTANT issue. It's m
Photo (Score:2)
What a waste of time... (Score:5, Insightful)
This is the biggest waste of time in the world. Let me do the freakin' parenting of my own children, and you figure out how to quit sending them off to die.
Seriously, it's not like buying a pack of cigarettes. The kid has to a.) buy the thing, only the older ones have money anyways, b.) has to play the thing, it's not like they can hide a TV and a 360 or PS3 in their pockets...
If my child is playing Manhunt 2, well, I probably know about it. If I wasn't having to bust my ass 24/7 to finance a trillion dollar war and a trillion dollar welfare system, maybe once in a blue moon I could, ya know, sit down with the children, and be aware of what they're doing and how it's effecting them.
Jesus. I've never hated politicians more than I do this very second. What a waste of time and money and resources, all the expense of so much other awful things going on in the world...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
"conservatives don't like to meddle"
The social conservatives that vote republican just
LOVE to meddle. They love to tell everyone else how
to live their lives. They've been doing it since
before prohibition. They've been doing it since their
ancestors landed at Plymouth Rock.
It's a great "feel good" bit of grandstanding for the
benefit of all of those "conservatives" in the middle
american Red States.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Trouble is, what's suitable for Carol's might not be suitable for Jane's. Jane may be a stripper who belongs to PETA and thinks "Deer Hunter" unsuitable for kids, while Carol might be a hunter who hates nudity and is shocked at the "hot coffee" mod.
The road to hell, as they say.
I agree - "think o
Time to start a new business (Score:2)
What are these congressmen bent out of shape over? You already have to be 17 to buy the game and provide proof of age and identification at the checkout.
Dear god, make it stop (Score:2)
Note to Senators: Ignore this piece of crap and it will go away, mention it as a reason to censor/restrict games and you will a) Enco
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Dear U.S. Senate (Score:2)
-beavis88
P.S. Get bent.
Re: (Score:2)
You said it! Why is this even a congressional issue at all? I really hate how absolutely everything under the sun has suddenly become the purview of Congress under the guise of regulating interstate commerce.
The ESRB is the industry's attempt at self-regulation, and for right now it doesn't include the beaurocracy of Congress and that's a Good Thing(tm). Congress, on the other hand, is like King Midas, except everything they touch turns to red tape. I find it interesting that the same people who want to pr
The other AO games... (Score:2, Informative)
All Nude Glamour
All Nude Nikki
Body Language
Crystal Fantasy
Critical Point
Cyber Photographer
Fahrenheit: Indigo Prophecy: Director's Cut
Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas
Leisure Suit Larry: Magna Cum Laude Uncut and Uncensored
Lula 3D
Peak Entertainment Casinos
Playboy the Mansion: Private Party
Playboy Screensaver: The Women of Playboy
Riana Rouge
Singles
Snow Drop
The Joy Of Sex
Thrill Kill
Tokimeki Checkin!
Water Closet: The Forbidden Chamber
WET: The Sexy Empire
X-Change
All but three made the cut explicitly fo
Re: (Score:2)
They modified it for the USA market, in the UK we got the normal story.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
No, wait. 22.
ummmm 19. Should have read the list first.
The Usual Suspects (Score:5, Insightful)
Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan.
Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind.
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y.
I already knew that three of four were going to be involved in stupid shit like this even before I RTFA.
Say what? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
[checks his Amazon Wishlist]
Damn, it would appear that I misread the PS2 version as being the PC version... or they reassigned the PC SKU to the PS2.
Well, I know I'll be disappointed if it doesn't come out as an unrated PC download.
Some articles on Hillary (Score:2)
From Nixon Girl to Watergate: The Making of Hillary Clinton [counterpunch.org]
The Seeds of Corruption: Hillary Clinton in Arkansas [counterpunch.org]
Secrecy, Intransigence and War: The Vices of Hillary Clinton [counterpunch.org]
Basically, she's a pro-war, corporate, conservative Democrat who has managed to hijack her party's nomination. It looks like another voting day is coming out where I ca
What they really mean is... (Score:3, Interesting)
considering that another election is due in a year, they are probably wondering why gaming companies are NOT paying any protection money.
Senators REALLY concerned about their citizens are almost as rare as Bush acknowledging that he was treating the constitution as toilet paper and resign.
Suddenly you would see a spike in their campaign contributions from these gaming companies...
Once done, this matter would be referred to a procedural committee just like cheney's impeachment.
Mod me down if you want, but you will see a spike in their contributions same time next year.
Ultraviolence?? (Score:4, Funny)
It should've gotten a 'G' rating (Score:2)
Frankly, I'll urge the ESRB to not bend under corporate pressure when the congressmen stop bending under corporate pressure.
Anyone care to make a point rather than bitch? (Score:2)
What's the point of AO? (Score:2)
they can rate it whatever they want (Score:2, Insightful)
Translation... (Score:2)
We must decide for you (Score:3, Interesting)
Just wait until they release the game ... (Score:3, Funny)
... "Senator Hunt 2". Your weapon is a big fat briefcase of cash.
Is there a Difference? (Score:3, Insightful)
Secondly, I see no difference between M and AO, it's only one freaking year of difference, it's not like there's a big difference between a 17 year old and an 18 year old.
The console makers need to get their heads out of their asses too, there's no reason that the system should refuse to play AO rated games. There's obviously a market demand for AO content and it's up to me to decide what to play on my system.
Thankfully we still have PC gaming which has no restrictions at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
that's because he's a terrorist
Re:Yeah, that's important... (Score:5, Insightful)
If you fight for gay rights (something sorely missing in America) you are attacked by the "Christian Conservatives", most of whom are as anti-christian as you can be.
If you fight for universal healthcare (yet another important thing), you are attacked by the powerful insurance lobby, and "fiscal conservatives", who are fine spending billions, but only if it goes into the pockets of their cronies.
If you attack video games, however, who attacks you? No (politically) powerful or influential group takes up the mantle. So while the intelligent may see it as a waste of time, and slashdotters may see it for what it is (a problem that could easily be solved if parents simply monitored their children), their is really no downside for the politician.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, and I think the new SoF:Payback game is more violent and realistic (and at least more fun), but no one seems to care about that game.