Topic: Manhunt 2 from Rockstar? Whoa...

[Requiem]

I think this game sounds bad ass.

You guys are taking it TOO SERIOUSLY. I don't know about you, but killing people in games has always cracked me up; whether its Halo and my rocket blows up a very distant warthog, or Prince of Persia's throw as many enemies off a cliff spree. That sh!t cracks me up.

It's Like, I don't know....a cheesy horror movie that's so gory it's funny. I remember seeing "Sabertooth Island" or whatever and laughing my ass off when this huge beast pounced on this dude and mauled him to death. Or while watching that part during Silent Hill where that dude rips this girl's skin off (I was like "DAAAAAAAAAAAAAMNNNN! hahahaHAHHA!"). Or how about 300? Nobody laughed or even smiled when that guy jumped out of that huddle of shields and jumped off his king to stab this dude in the heart? That was PRICELESS!

I don't know, that's just me I guess.  

[D_MaN87]

At first I had no plan on buying it.  I played Manhunt 1, liked it, but not enough to bother buying.  But IGN's impressions really have me wanting it now.  At the least I will rent it beforehand, and then buy it.

[Gamebasher]

Luigi Dude, I agree with you one hundred percent!

Manhunt 2 is indeed violence in a very sad way. A MURDER simulator, and it doesn´t matter if it is virtual puppets that gets killed to me. If the U.S. Military can PRACTISE kills in a videogame, so can civilians! It is the same all the way. You practise killing people in horrific ways, and now it is really practising killing people because this game takes it to a far more detailed and gruesome level. You can hate me for saying it, but I stand by what I say. I just think it is taking kills on the screen to a slippery territory where good little Nintendo kids ought not to be!

What is the INTENT, Kairon, behind liking VIEWING the killing to that extent, and in that excessive way in which it takes place in Manhunt 2? Was the intent to have fun watching people getting smashed up, brutally maimed, beaten to a pulp? Or was the intent to chill out and get rid of anger? No offense intended. I am just trying to understand the mindset of players who like to play such games.

I will never play that game, but I know from others what it is all about. Running man or not. If I ran from somebody, and they were trying to kill me, I would just defend and kill if needed. Buy I would never go to extremes. THat means, if I was forced to take a crowbar to knock somebody down and incapaciate that pursuer - I would. To survive. And that is the key phrase for me: survival. Nescessity alone. Not excessiveness! THAT is not needed. If you want to kill somebody out of nescessity in a situaltion where it´s "you or him", by all means do it. But don´t make a show out of it!

That game all begins to sound more and more like a cover story created to justify the amount of violence in the game. In other words, Rockstar wanted to make ANOTHER game full of "justified" violence, and make a buck on it! So, the violence was primary, the story secondary in the efforts make said game. THAT worries me. Plain and simple as that.

It is a slippery slope... And no matter how much you say that you can educate people in the opposite direction so they don´t get hoodwinked into becoming violent, playing violence to this extent is something that will never be good for anyone in the long run. But some people take decades to tire of it. I take just a few minutes to drop it on the floor... But that is just me!

 

[Requiem]

Quote
Originally posted by: Gamebasher
Luigi Dude, I agree with you one hundred percent!

Manhunt 2 is indeed violence in a very sad way. A MURDER simulator, and it doesn´t matter if it is virtual puppets that gets killed to me. If the U.S. Military can PRACTISE kills in a videogame, so can civilians! It is the same all the way.

Okay. That's all I needed to read.

Manhunt is as much a murder game as Thief is a stealing game. The point is: yes it's wrong to do in the real world, but this is a game. A creative medium that requires interaction from the user. Just cause the interaction is more sophisticated, doesn't mean its negative effect (if any) is greater.

And honestly, if you believe that people are so bendable, so weak that we would sacome (sp?) to killing a human being just because a media said that, in this instance, it is what you want to do, than wow.....you really don't have faith in the human race at all, and honestly, your reminding me of Kyle's big fat bitch of a mom (southpark).

"Blame the Corporations!" "Think of the CHILDREN!"

I hate hearing those things because, in most instances, its really the parents lack of parenting that f#cks everything up.

[Kairon]

Quote
Originally posted by: Gamebasher
What is the INTENT, Kairon, behind liking VIEWING the killing to that extent, and in that excessive way in which it takes place in Manhunt 2? Was the intent to have fun watching people getting smashed up, brutally maimed, beaten to a pulp? Or was the intent to chill out and get rid of anger? No offense intended. I am just trying to understand the mindset of players who like to play such games.

Hmm... from rereading an earlier post of yours I picked up the following quote:

Quote
The way I experience it on a personal level, is that if I play something as violent as Manhunt, I get to feel like I step down to a lower, cruder level of existence, and I suddenly feel I am nolonger myself.

I can understand your stance on the subject, but these games will always have an appeal to people, just like horror movies and thrillers and other such media. I guess the reasons might include the need for catharsis, a curiousity and excitement for the socially taboo, an investigations of darker human experiences, and simply that not everyone experiences it personally the way someone else might.

I'm not particularly interested in the killings themselves of ManHunt 2... I'm sort of "meh" about choking people in Godfather because it simply doesn't do anything special for me compared to filling them with holes via a tommy gun. What's really interesting is all the dark subject matter that's supposed to have been the reason for violence of that sort. Plenty of films and games have people dying. What's so special about the themes explored in these games that need to make us physically pull out their vertebra?

And of course, part of the appeal of these experiences is, yes, as an outlet. Violence is natural to us (though hopefully VERY undesirable). So we play Counter Strike, we play Halo, and etc. etc.

But some people, unavoidably, have a different level of violence that they find blase. It's nothing particularly special. Some people like spicy food and some people don't. Some among us don't mind rated R movies and some find them utterly excessive and wasteful. There are some gamers who actually YAWN (ZOMG!) at Zelda because it's too easy: they need more hardcore, difficult, and almost impossible challenges in their games because anything less just doesn't excite them the same way.

There's no avoiding a diversity of tastes, and thus the diversity of entertainment to suit those different segments, from rated G (Finding Nemo is AWEWSOME) to rated NC-17 (which would have been the rating for Academy award nominee "Requiem for a Dream"... it was released 'unrated' to avoid this).

...

But this is all rambling... And Gamebasher, I guess I can COMPLETELY sympathize with your position because i HATED Ren and Stimpy, much like I DESPISE Family Guy. That stuff makes me feel less human when I watch it, like they expect me to just keel over and drool at each (albeit pop-culturally-relevant) 30 second vignette that assumes I can't follow a solid narrative thread.

There must be SOME redeeming value to Family Guy, but I'd dearly LOVE to know what goes on in the mind of a rapt, appreciative viewer... because I can't for the life of me picture what could be appealing about that show. Just like you can't imagine what goes on in the mind of someone playing Manhunt (never played the first one by the way... this'll be a new experience!)  

[Kairon]

Quote
Originally posted by: Gamebasher
Luigi Dude, I agree with you one hundred percent!

Manhunt 2 is indeed violence in a very sad way. A MURDER simulator, and it doesn´t matter if it is virtual puppets that gets killed to me. If the U.S. Military can PRACTISE kills in a videogame, so can civilians! It is the same all the way. You practise killing people in horrific ways, and now it is really practising killing people because this game takes it to a far more detailed and gruesome level. You can hate me for saying it, but I stand by what I say. I just think it is taking kills on the screen to a slippery territory where good little Nintendo kids ought not to be!

I actually share your concern about the social effects of interactive violence... but I don't buy this "murder simulator" talk at all. The wiimote is cool and all, but it can't detect anywhere NEAR the sort of actions that could be called realistic in any sense of the world. Have you tried to strangle people in Godfather? I hardly think it's realistic to hold B, press A, then move your hands toward the screen, away from the screen, toward the screen, away from the screen, until somehow the neck of your target cracks as if you had just cracked it instead of merely constricted it. I DO think we'll come to a point where interactions become "too close" to reality, but we're not there yet, not by a long shot.

But EVEN WHEN we get there... if you don't believe that people can be educated and made to be held responsible for their own actions, I don't know what to say. A world in which we can't try to trust people to do the right thing (properly educated and empowered, of course) is a world in which a fascist government that removes our personal freedoms and controls every aspect of our lives makes sense. YES, it is scary to see how people can lose control of their lives and thoughts due to today's high-tech distractions, but if we admit defeat, then we're saying that we're powerless to control our own actions, and barely human at all. I don't see any other alternative than believing that humans ARE, basically, good and, that they want to be good more than they want to be evil.

[Gamebasher]

Wow! That was one of the best replies to a topic that I have ever seen. Sincire in every word! Thanks, Kairon!

You wrote in your reply part 1:

"I can understand your stance on the subject, but these games will always have an appeal to people, just like horror movies and thrillers and other such media. I guess the reasons might include the need for catharsis, a curiousity and excitement for the socially taboo, an investigations of darker human experiences, and simply that not everyone experiences it personally the way someone else might."

And I will just double quote one part of that above quote: "but these games will always have an appeal to people, just like horror movies and thrillers and other such media."

OK, I guess I now understand the mindset of players who plays games like this. But, I would like to say that, I do not think that people are incapable of controlling themselves. I don´t see people as trolls, or dero´s or other mindless killingmachines without any feelings for the "victims". I was looking for a trend, a streak of something which might explain to me what was the motivation behind the desire to play such violence in games.  I admit that I was worried that people were starting to move in a direction of crudeness which would take them only down in human evolution. I now think I have seen a glimpse of the truth about that, through your input.

I agree that people are drawn to such games for the same reason as the reason why they are drawn to horror movies. And so I can more easily agree with you that of course people try to always be more good than evil. Which is in the end good for society overall.

This is the best insight that any Forum member here ever gave me. So if I were to give you kudo´s for your reply to my topic it would be the highest ones! May every member in this Nintendo Forum gain similar understanding and insight through such dialogue. Prior to this "enlightenment" of mine, I was in the dark concerning peoples motivations for playing very violent games. I was worried about them, and what it might make them become. I guess I can even say that Rockstar´s own motivation behind the making of that game in particular was to create a new threshold for interactive horror-entertainment! You are now IN the horror-movie, so to speak. Future will show if people ever get too influenced by the violence for their own good. Here´s hoping they wont!

 

[j_moose]

There were a couple of times when I was reading IGN's impressions when I thought, "is this really necessary?" - but then again, what video games really ARE necessary? They're supposed to be a temporary escape from reality, and that is exactly what this game is...you certainly couldn't (shouldn't, perhaps) do this in real life. I am not the kind of person who would go downtown and beat the crap out of somebody just to see what it feels like, but I'm not going to lie - it's somewhat satisfying to strangle somebody or pop them in the face with a shotgun in a video game. I guess it just depends on your point of view whether you consider it "sick" or just "not something you would do in real-life".

As a gamer and a very liberal person, I am somewhat biased, but my opinion of "videogames causing violence" is that people who "learn to kill" from video games are messed up to begin with. Sure it has been shown that playing violent video games increases aggression, but seriously - if you play this game and think, "that looks like fun, I'm going to go try it on my neighbor", it's not the video game's fault - there's something wrong with you from the get-go. The game isn't reality, plain and simple. That's just my two cents. I'll at least give it a rental - after all, if the game isn't fun, no amount of violence is going to make it worth the money. How do you guys think this will affect sales and the image of the Wii? There are obviously the "Nintendo is for kids" people who are going to see the game and just might change their opinion. But what about the people who bought Nintendo stuff just FOR the "kid" image? Do you think they'll be turned off/feel betrayed because the brand they always bought for their kids just put this on their system? Those who were deciding whether to buy a Wii might either be inclined to buy it because of the game, or stay away from it at the thought that their kids could play something like this on the system. I do agree that, despite the violence and controversy, this is a great step forward for Nintendo.

[Gamebasher]

Yeah, maybe it´s a step forward for Nintendo. In any event, there has also been parents who bought Playstation´s and Xbox´es for their kids knowing the violent content also available on those platforms. It didn´t seem to have any impact on the parents. With Nintendo it is slightly different, as they have traditionally shunned games of this kind and with Miyamoto openly confessing that they do not make games of that type. I think that it could have been a smart move by Nintendo, but they should be carefull not to allow a flooding of such games on Wii, like it has always been on the other two systems, and in particular the Playstation. This would lower the value of the system in the parents eyes, and equal it with the other two.

Nintendo could thus risk being viewed no more as a kids friendly-gamemaker which today is their greatest asset. This is in my view the greatest danger to them right now, because they have a huge crowd of fans for the GameBoy and Nintendo DS systems, and also Wii (but not as large here yet). If they are suddenly losing their kids-appeal, they will be in the boat with Sony, and also Microsoft, and then this would surely start a chain reaction of dwindling support by families worldwide for the brand, and the sales would then go instead to the other two as there would nolonger by any perceived advantage to kids for the parents. They wouldn´t be able to tell the difference between the three competing gamecompanies as both Sony and Microsoft are trying to take Nintendo´s kids appeal already with quite strong franchises (though Microsoft still has a very long way to go there).

So they should carefully watch their steps, and those of their competitors. They are treading on dangerous ground, with money luring people everywhere to try to steal their crown.

Nintendo should keep on developing kids friendly games, and filter the opposite very carefully. I actually think that the Manhunt 2 game has been allowed onto the Wii, because Nintendo wants to boost their campaign to attract a more mature audience. It is a test to see what will happen next. But the way I see it, it is very dangerous. Because on one hand they will then turn heads on adults, who will probably love the game on Wii for it´s superior controls. However, the next thing that will likely happen is that that same audience will cry out for more of such games on the system. Never before has there been such a way to interact with the game world as right now on the Wii. This is certain to spark a craving for more violent games, where you can go smack somebody good with your arms gesticulations making it feel much more real. So the demand will be big. So who will they listen to at Nintendo? The kids, or the adults? They cannot cater to both as it is now. The families wont allow a situation where there is a flooding of violence on the system as they will incapable of ensuring the mental safety of their kids being home alone. They would be worried day and night, I know this. So in the end they will drop the system if they feel it is nolonger kids friendly. How will they satisfy the families who don´t want their kids to have access to such violence when they aren´t around to watch them play? I suggest that if they want to avoid the situation described above, they should create a parental lock on the Wii, which prohibtis games that are too explicitly violent! Then their kids cannot play those games, but only the kids friendly ones. It is up to Nintendo to figure out how they will do just that. I don´t own a Wii yet, as I am waiting for Metroid Prime 3 to come out first, so I don´t know if the Wii has such a function already.  

[oohhboy]

It is a lose - lose trade-off gamebasher. The casual market is great for thier ability to buy low budget games at or near "full" price, in large numbers, but they are also the least loyal. The hardcore are needed to so devs will make the blockbuster titles we like to play whether it is Wind Waker or Manhunt otherwise everybody gets Barbies Dream Holiday and the industry crashes as games become too much a race for the lowest common denominator. Basicly crap games flood.

The rating systems are already in place to help parents filter out for their own kids what is suitible or not. It is just that most parents these days don't give a flying F*** what happens to their kids and when something does go wrong, they are too busy absolving themselfs of personal responsiblity to fix the problem. No console V-chip is going to solve the underlying social problem. House said it best "Parents are stupid, incompetant and liars".

When Nintendo did censore the games that came on to the system, it caused far more problems than it solved. For 10 years, the kids only image has been made a scapegoat for countless devs not to make a game for Nintendo. Creatives don't like to be censored even if it probaly won't apply to them. The fear is enough. Then you end up with a console death spiral. The devs simply went to a console where they could do what they want.

As for the whole, "Oh no, games are getting too real and people are going to go mental because of this", better now we have this discussion than down the line where people are jacking up to play games. That has always been a question, but now that some componets to virtual reality are available at a comsumer level beyond just graphics, it has given the question material reality. To be honest, there will be no point trying to stop it. People can and will get addicted to anything regardless to the level of reality whether it be drugs or shoes. Mental people will do mental things regardless of what well meaning people will try o do. We can only mitigate the damage caused and move on. That is the price of a free and open society. If you don't like it, move to China.

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: oohhboy When Nintendo did censore the games that came on to the system, it caused far more problems than it solved. For 10 years, the kids only image has been made a scapegoat for countless devs not to make a game for Nintendo. Creatives don't like to be censored even if it probaly won't apply to them. The fear is enough. Then you end up with a console death spiral. The devs simply went to a console where they could do what they want.

This is the real reason MH2 exists for the Wii: Reggie decreed it. He was the one who went to Rockstar and bargained with them to make a Wii game.

They, more than any other company, would readily crush the "kiddié" image on the Wii if they brought a game to it, especially a game like MH2.

I personally don't like the idea of kids playing this game, but that's due to the old adage of "If you never show a kid a flamethrower, he'll never try to build one." However, I like the idea of censoring content which is intended only for adults even less because, like the Southpark episodes about Family Guy pointed out, if you can force them to censor something once, you can force them to do it every time.

[j_moose]

Quote
Originally posted by: Gamebasher

...they will be in the boat with Sony, and also Microsoft, and then this would surely start a chain reaction of dwindling support by families worldwide for the brand

I guess that is the point/question I was getting at: clearly this will open the system up to a new audience and maybe even tip some people toward the Wii who were on the fence - but is this worth possibly alienating the 'family' audience?  I think as long as there is a balance of games that can satisfy both audiences, the system will be fine.

[Adrock]

Just a thought: could you potentially get through the entire game without killing anyone at all or by the very least, knocking them unconscious? I know that's a little too Metal Gear. However, I think not killing as an alternative would add another dimension to the game, not to mention bragging rights (like beating Zelda without picking up any heart upgrades).

[Kairon]

Quote
Originally posted by: Adrock
Just a thought: could you potentially get through the entire game without killing anyone at all or by the very least, knocking them unconscious? I know that's a little too Metal Gear. However, I think not killing as an alternative would add another dimension to the game, not to mention bragging rights (like beating Zelda without picking up any heart upgrades).

That could work for some games, but I something tells me that Manhunt 2 is built around the assumption that you have no other recourse, that you've already been driven to violence as a last, desperate, necessary, resort.

[couchmonkey]

...and enjoyable, don't forget enjoyable.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

MH2 puts everyone in the mood for spaghetti.

[Gamebasher]

Oohhboy, wrote:

"The rating systems are already in place to help parents filter out for their own kids what is suitible or not. It is just that most parents these days don't give a flying F*** what happens to their kids and when something does go wrong, they are too busy absolving themselfs of personal responsiblity to fix the problem. No console V-chip is going to solve the underlying social problem. House said it best "Parents are stupid, incompetant and liars"."

A tall statement, if you ask me. Since when has all parents suddenly become stupid, incompetent liars? Perhaps you would be so kind and tell me where they live? I have only seen parents who care for their kids, and who would not be found dead with their kids sitting around them playing ultra-violent games - even if you tried to force them to make them do so. And I will tell you right away, that if parents they don´t give a damn what their kids are playing, they will disturb their moral values right from the start. Kids don´t know anything when they are born, they have to learn it all from scratch. So what do you think it will teach them, if they sit and play an ultra violent game where they get POINTS for consciously performing the most violent kills? It will teach them that it is OK to DO so! There is simply no discussion about it, it has been proved that violence of that level seen in MH2 directly affects people who play it in the way of moving their acceptance to violence up (IGN article, but I have seen it elsewhere too). Kids are even more easily influenced, and so they will be double affected. What they will do, become if not properly reared and influenced only time can tell.

The way I understand it from the many replies to my original argument against MH2 is that these days money starts to matter more than moral values. I always though of Nintendo as a videogame company which was first and foremost interested in making games for fun and entertainment. Not money alone. Sure money matters, without them you can´t get far. But there is a clear difference between focusing on making games for the sake of entertainment, and making games for the sake of money! I hope that Nintendo and Reggie wont lose their heads in the quest to once again become the market leader! If they do, NIntendo will to me nolobger be the family friendly company that they have become so famous for being. Right now I still believe in them.

While I as stated in my previous reply now understand grown up people´s motivation for playing such games, I maintain that kids should NOT play that kind of games at all. And it will be the problem of society worldwide to deal with whatever comes out of not restricting their access to them. It looks an awefull lot like an emerging break down of society, if parents begin to give a hoot what their kids are exposed to and influenced by! Kids are the adults of tomorrow! We should all be carefull what we shape them to become. I can tell you that I will never drop my insistance that you gotta be so carefull about what you teach kids. They will become what you make them, with your input. Because they know nothing from the start, like an empty computer whom someone programs!

Why do you think there are so many adults who got damaged in childhood by this or that experience which was imprinted in their minds, and who now have to be brought back on the right track through theraphy? Yes I know they didn´t have games then, the way we do now. But they had other things which could affect them. I have always read about- and watched programmes on tv about such cases. No kidding, this is real. It happened to people before, and it will happen to people again. Sooner or later it will manifest itself in peoples behaviour one way or the other. Kids can certainly be adversely affected, if not seriously disturbed by ultra violent content in games. Some kids are certainly more easily affected than others. The game companies should keep that in mind when they make games for the worlds people to play. I therefore still maintain that a parental lock out system is the only solution to keeping kids from playing adult gaming content on consoles! And the age restriction system is no barrier at all. Kids are incredibly capable of circumventing rules if they want to (say, to get liquor they aren´t allowed to buy), and here they don´t even have to. The games are freely available to take down from the shelves over at EB Games, and they can get somebody older to buy them Ă­f not allowed themselves by the  store clerk or -manager.

[denjet78]

Quote
Originally posted by: Gamebasher
Kids are incredibly capable of circumventing rules if they want to (say, to get liquor they aren´t allowed to buy), and here they don´t even have to. The games are freely available to take down from the shelves over at EB Games, and they can get somebody older to buy them Ă­f not allowed themselves by the  store clerk or -manager.

You seem to be missing and incredibly important point here even though you basically state it yourself. Kids have, and always will, find ways to get access to things that society has deemed inappropriate for them. What does that mean then in regard to video games? Do we ban certain games just so kids won't get access to them? If so, then why haven't we banned cigarettes? Alcohol? Guns? Cars? Anything that you wouldn't allow a new born infant to be around? Once something becomes age restrictive it falls into the same category as MH2. You can't just pick and choose what you want to ban to protect kids from.

As it is, I think MH is disgusting. I think GTA is nothing but a violence simulator and I would like nothing more than to see such terrible games wiped from the face of the earth. However, I do not and will never believe in censoring anything simply because someone feels it is inappropriate for kids. If they think it's not for kids then make it age restricted and then enforce those restrictions, and that includes parents keeping tabs on what they're kids are doing. They're the first line of defense after all.

No one's talking about banning "R" rated movies. Hell, no one's even talking about banning porn! The most they've done is design a system to attempt to keep them out of kids hands until they reach a certain age. Why should video games receive any kind of different treatment?

And as for these games being "freely available to take down from the shelves over at EB Games", you could say the same thing about "R" rated movies at your local Wal-Mart. In fact, I don't think anyone's making any kind of ruckus over the fact that a kid can walk into almost any store and pick up almost any movie no matter what the rating. If you're going to attack video games I think it's only fair that you include movies in there as well. And books. And CDs. And web sites.

Once you begin censoring though... where does it end?

[Spak-Spang]

After reading the previews for this game I can completely say I am disgusted and disappointed this game is coming out.  I some what defend the games like Godfather, Grand Theft Auto, and Scarface...although it is violent the games do not have some sort of love affair with the gore.

Manhunt 2 just seems to want to create computer animated gore and filth...and I don't care if there is a story to support the filth, this game is completely not needed.

This is one time I believe, Nintendo should have said NO.  Do I think it should be the government controlling and censoring.  No.  That leads to some scary stuff.  But Nintendo should have said no...or really Rock Star should of had the self control to say no.

[oohhboy]

As much as I like technology and it's power to solve the very problems it can create, this problem isn't one of those. Violence in our sociality is a social engineering problem. It's multi-dimensional solutions are far too complex for just one person to imagine or communicate in something as crude as an internet forum. Besides it would spill into politics within the first paragraph without fail.

Man Hunt isn't made by Nintendo and such a game will never be made by Nintendo. Sure, Nintendo is indrectly responsible simply for allowing the game to exist on it's platform but what good would Nintendo do by disallowing it? Nintendo's experiment in censoreship at the end of the 16bit wars shows that people don't care what is in the game, but what is not in it. You are asking Nintendo to sacarfice itself in an futile attemp at large scale social change using the worse, bluntest tool in an incomplete tool set. The non-games or I like to call social games the Nintendo publish and develop are the opposing force to Man Hunt. Nintendo has not forfited the so called moral high ground if there ever was such a thing and continues to acknowledge it's responibility to the world by bettering the world in it's own unquie way.

I play violent games all the time. I understand it is violent. I understand it is not real and if I do things like that it would result in alot of pain. Why should I be deprived of such a game just because of the 1% out there that didn't. Running anything thing in fear of 1% probability of failure is not a way to do anything or live. We have parents out there that try to change the world so their kids can fit in, not the other way around. They are stupid, incompetent and liars. They are stupid for trying to change the world, incompetent for not raising a kid that can survie on it's own and liars for everything they said to their child about the world. We have the other end where the parents don't do anything. They are stupid for thinking that their child will know what to do when they grow up. Incompetent for their apathy towards their children. Liars for not communicating anything at any level.

I refuse to let that 1% ruin my life whether it is terrorism, Jack Tompson, fundamentalist or that punk kid who gave me that one finger salute.

[Spak-Spang]

I understand why Nintendo isn't censoring the game.  And I am not really asking Nintendo to censor it.  Nintendo can decide to do what it wants.

Now, do I wish Nintendo would have dropped its censorship standards to be competitive yes...but I also want Nintendo to review games on a case to case bases to decide if its something they want.  For Nintendo to say they don't want Grand Theft Auto or God of War or Half Life or Resident Evil series because its too violent is stupid and suicide as a console hardware maker.  

However, if Nintendo took a stand against Manhunt 2, and said you know what Rock Star, we love your games, and would like your support...but Manhunt is not a series we want to support.  The concept of the game is not something we ever want to appear that we support...but if you would like to bring over Ping Pong and Grand Theft Auto we would like to help you.

Nintendo wouldn't be saying no for nothing...it would be standing up for its personal business intriguity and ideals on what is legitiment content for gaming and what isn't.

I see a huge difference in a game like Manhunt 2 and Resident Evil 4...and I wish others would have the courage to standup to say so as well.

[Kairon]

Dude, this is some awesome voice acting and writing. Also NSFW, but every link in this thread is basically NSFW.

I'm pretty excited for this and hope it fulfills all its promise instead of being just another decent videogame... I just put down a pre-order for it too.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

It's no big deal.

=D

[couchmonkey]

I actually quite agree with you Spak. I get that the game plot offers some type of motivation, but I find the content pretty gross.  I don't feel it should be censored, but I likely won't be playing the game.

Ali G: Has you ever had an abortion?
Protestor: No I've never had an abortion.
Ali G: Surely you should try something before you say is bad.  

[Gamebasher]

Spak-Spang wrote:

"After reading the previews for this game I can completely say I am disgusted and disappointed this game is coming out. I some what defend the games like Godfather, Grand Theft Auto, and Scarface...although it is violent the games do not have some sort of love affair with the gore.

Manhunt 2 just seems to want to create computer animated gore and filth...and I don't care if there is a story to support the filth, this game is completely not needed."

Like I have already pointed out, I feel that this game is going too far. It is too much. So I hope people will realize this, since it is abominable. I agree that Godfather-type of games are somewhat more acceptable, as it makes more sense to perform the kills there since you play the role a mob hitman (havent played it, but I believe that is what it is about, correct me if I am wrong). You "know" why you must kill, to serve your master the Godfather. Just like a foot soldier would a General. There is no point in the kills in MH2, except survival at the very crudest level of existence. As a Hitman, you are at least civilzed when you don´t kill. Here it seems (remember that the game so disgusts me, I don´t keep myself updated about it and so I don´t know and don´t wanna know anymore about it) you are just a primate killing to the left and right without dawn of reason. There has to be reason behind something, or you border insanity. Or pure evilness. That is the same as to say that in MH2 you practise being totally insane, or totally evil. Fun, huh! Don´t see the entertainment value in that.

As for censoring everything, I agree it isn´t good to censor everything. But I think it is needed to censor some things. You don´t get affected by a cigarettes the way you get affected by a videogame which glorifies violence. I maintain my point of view that such levels of violence in a game, and in particular the intent behind that violence (in MH2: to get points the more violent or gruesome the kills) is more hazardous to anyones health than any cigarettes will ever be. One way or the other.