Violent Game Banned

Manhunt 2, sequel to Manhunt has (sadly IMO) been banned since the BBFC refused a rating.

The first game was on PS2 and to be released in the UK it was editted. In the USA it had the highest rating and in Australia is was banned.
It caused a bloody lot of controversy and a lot of people have fought to ban both games, one being Jack Thomspson, an American Attorney who has fought against games such as GTA, Manhunt and the Sims 2 (really) and who has got involved in cases blaming them on video games.

It came after someone called Stefan was lured into a parking lot by a 'friend' and hammered and knifed to death. Apparantly the murderer was obsessed with the game. That is the spin the newspapers took on it, though police denied the link between the murder and games

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/leicestershire/3538066.stm

I don't personally see the point in violent games. However, if a game is good and violent i may buy it and i was not going to buy this game, and made my decision that i wanted to only after all the controversy to see it first hand. It is excessively violent yes, but i stand with my opinion that video games do not make children killers. It just gives them ideas. There does appear to be a link between the game and the death due to the way he was killed but i still say that the murderer (leblanc) was a murderer. You need to be demented and capable of murder to do such a thing and a video game won't change this.

In fact, i think that when this manhunt game is released (whether editted or through appeal) the publicity will boost sales, like the 'Hot Coffee' incident oover RockStar game GTA: San Andreas. The parents of the murdered boy can not bring back the past from banning Manhunt 2, and although i can see why they have fought hard to get the sequel banned, i think they have (for good reason) lookedat it narrowly. The boy was also obsessed with violent films also so why can that not be the reason. His obsession itself with violence would have came from his demented personality, liking violence and it is unfair from a gamers eyes that a good game (itgot high scores) should be banned. And i wasn't planning on getting it.

A normal person will play manhunt and enjoy it for what it is, a game. A troubled person will play the game and enjoy it for what it is even. If someone capable of murder plas the game, it won't make him want to kill more but just give ideas. Although that alone is bad, i think instead of banning a game, enforcing the age limit would be a better choice, such as movies do. It is 18 for a reason and that should be enforced. I have tried to buy 18 rated games before and only ASDA and my local game store have ever stopped me. Markets and large gaming chain stored don't seem to be bothered, especially if you get the right employee that you really spot from a mile.

These links between violent games and crime always comes up with minors. The game is an 18. Saw is a gross movie that wasn't banned, in fact, i have not heard of violent movies being banned to be honest. Ever.

This is obviously going to be controversial since i think many people's views will differ to mine.

As you say the problem is the enforcement of the age certificate for the game. I don't see a problem with a game being violent but if it is supposed to be only for 18+ then that should be enforced by the retialers and parents.

You feel a lot of the time parents who are very careful about film certification will allow their children to play any game regardless....

Some films are banned or at least parts of them censored...

It's very hard to make a decision on anything like this because the majority of people playing the game will not be influenced to commit acts of violence. Sadly, as we know from prominent cases, games, films and music can all have an unwelcome effect.

I am not convinced that putting age restrictions on these things will stop the high profile cases. After all, if you are the sort of person who might be influenced to commit acts of violence because you have been paying particularly violent games, it is unlikely that being over 18 will make you any less likely to be so inclined.

As we know, finding a happy medium is the key and that is not easy

The other day i went to see Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End and got asked my age. I'm nearly 17 and the damn thing is a 12A. I lok young but not that young. It happens a lot, proving rules can be enforced. Though they are harder for games with parents but that should be the parents responsibility.

The High Profile cases never seem to be people over 18 and i believe that this is all because of the parents of murdered children, JAck Thompson and whatever paper likes to rant. So far i have read this story (it is an old story from years back which has surfaced due to the sequel) in The Sun and The Daily Mail, puting the spin on violent games being the main enphasis (over movies) even though the police said there was no link. It is true that violent games brought by an 18 year old will not make them less inclined to re-do the violent acts so it can only be hoped they have matured a little however unlikely it may seem. Thing is though, it is games, not films which is always getting hit.

There will also always be violence. There was before the existence of games, and there will be even if all violent games are banned. I obviously feel sorry forthis boy but police said robbery was the reason so the game should not be banned due to murders like this. Murders will always happen. Leblanc would have murdered anyway, regardless of the game since it is his personality/disorder and the game would just give ideas. Or it may just be a conincidence. The boy was hammered once and knifed to death. Knifes are common obviously to use for violence.

A happy medium will be hard to come by, because there will always be people hating these games. And Jack Thompson is also trying to ban GTAIV, one of the most high profile games anyone has heard of. All's banning a game does is boost sales when it is editted because of the publicity.

fizzywizzy wrote:

It's very hard to make a decision on anything like this because the majority of people playing the game will not be influenced to commit acts of violence. Sadly, as we know from prominent cases, games, films and music can all have an unwelcome effect.

I am not convinced that putting age restrictions on these things will stop the high profile cases. After all, if you are the sort of person who might be influenced to commit acts of violence because you have been paying particularly violent games, it is unlikely that being over 18 will make you any less likely to be so inclined.

As we know, finding a happy medium is the key and that is not easy

I think the theory is that in general children are more impressionable than adults and while it is generalised I think some sort of control has to be in place. If nothing else the violnce might not lead them to comit violence but might confuse or upset very young children especially.

I'm not so sure though that there is any strong evidence to link violent bahaviour to games films or music. The porminent cases you speka of have tried to make that link and there is some limited research that suggests both sides of the argument but a lot more has to be done.

Personally, I find it quite disturbing that people would want to play games that entail the person playing "killing", "blowing up" or doing something particularly nasty to anyone. But I also know that there are plenty of well-adjusted people who play them.

However, the games can get into the wrong hands. My partner's nephew asked for the Scarface Game for his birthday and when we went into the store and looked at it, my suspicions were confirmed. It is an 18 certficate game, but he was 11 at the time. We informed his mother that we would suggest other ideas becasue the game was not suitable and she expressed not only surprise that games come with a rating but that we would not buy it regardless of the certificate.

While I would say that parents SHOULD be aware that games come with a rating, many people (for example, grandparents) may no be and will always be happy to indulge the child.

In the end, if the censors think it unsuitable they will decide for themselves, and those people who don't like it will jus have to complain.

I work with young offenders and I would say that they are very much influenced by the violence in games - they might not go out and kill but they do get stoked up from playing the games. The language and general mood arising from these games is quite frightening when you hear a group of fifteen year olds palying them. We don't buy violent games for the project but they do sometimes get inside the premises and when they do its quite frightening to hear the reaction

Scareface and Reservoir Dogs games are extremely violent and definitely not suitable for an 11 year old

butters wrote:

Scareface and Reservoir Dogs games are extremely violent and definitely not suitable for an 11 year old

At what age are they suitable? They have a 18 certificate, you stated you're nearly 17 but you've played them?

Would they be OK for a 14 year old? a 15 year old? how about 16? The whole thing is subjective which is why it makes it difficult to control...

Well im well rounded and generally don't play the violent games. I play 18 rated games-but those that are mainly due to swearing or other weird reasons. I've played Scarface and Reservoir Dogs at mates houses and they're pretty bad. I wouldn't let anyone below 16 play them personally even if they were well rounded. I know i'm not going to be affected by those games but i wouldn;t trust anyone below 16 with them.

It does make it subjective and difficult to control I know but i would rather have games like Manhunt 2 out and not be able to buy 18 rated games (i'd pick them up eventually) than have 18 rated games banned just because the age is hard to control. It would annoy quite a few, since i think the majority of PS3 owners are looking out for games such as GTAIV, but overall strict control is needed.

These are my 18 rated games:

The Getaway-mainly due to swearing every sentence more than anything.
-GTA III-violent. Not very good either.
-GTA: San Andreas-violent and decent. Though no real excessive violence like in Manhunt. Guns, lots of guns.
-Metal Gear Solid-i have no idea why this is 18 rated
-Metal Gera Solid 2: Sons of liberty-have no idea again why its rated 18, its just hard
-Mortal Kombat: Armageddon-a beat 'em up which is extremely violent. A 'finisher' for a mtach is violent, such as ripping someones head off and throwing it at their body. It's too unrealistic though for it to be real violence.

Many games are excessively violent such as Scarface on PS2, and also Manhunt and Manhunt II. However, aside from the violence Manhunt is good (i have played but not got) and Manhunt 2 looked promising.

In Manhunt originally you had a headset and you could hear the thoughts and breathing of your psychopath you played as. Eerie, and definitely you must be 18 to play it. And i mean 18.

My parents know im mature enough to handle these games though so not bothered about me having them. however many parents just buy their children games because it's easier arguing.

butters wrote:

Well im well rounded and generally don't play the violent games. I play 18 rated games-but those that are mainly due to swearing or other weird reasons. I've played Scarface and Reservoir Dogs at mates houses and they're pretty bad. I wouldn't let anyone below 16 play them personally even if they were well rounded. I know i'm not going to be affected by those games but i wouldn;t trust anyone below 16 with them.

It does make it subjective and difficult to control I know but i would rather have games like Manhunt 2 out and not be able to buy 18 rated games (i'd pick them up eventually) than have 18 rated games banned just because the age is hard to control. It would annoy quite a few, since i think the majority of PS3 owners are looking out for games such as GTAIV, but overall strict control is needed.

My parents know im mature enough to handle these games though so not bothered about me having them. however many parents just buy their children games because it's easier arguing.

A parent can make sure they don't buy their child a game that the censors have rated unsuitable for their age but what if they go to a friends house, where the parents there are not so strict - or just don't even realise?

Do you tell the other kids parents that your child can't play those games? Do you stop your child from going there?

As far as i can see, the problems in policing who sees/plays with what are unenforcable and so the raters need to be really tough

If I had my way I would ban all kids from having playstations, XBox, Wii etc lol What ever happened to going out and getting some fresh air!!??

It's the same as buying alcohol, fags, DVD's- you will always get people who buy them under age.

Quote :

Personally, I find it quite disturbing that people would want to play games that entail the person playing "killing", "blowing up" or doing something particularly nasty to anyone

I agree- I can't think of anything more pointless or strange to do with my time.

Quote :

and the Sims 2 (really)

Now there is a game that should not be sold to kids! I somehow got into the Sims and was shocked to see you could make your sims 'make out' and there was even a life goal to sleep with as many different sims as possible.

spoilt_little_brat wrote:

If I had my way I would ban all kids from having playstations, XBox, Wii etc lol What ever happened to going out and getting some fresh air!!??

It's the same as buying alcohol, fags, DVD's- you will always get people who buy them under age.

Quote :

Personally, I find it quite disturbing that people would want to play games that entail the person playing "killing", "blowing up" or doing something particularly nasty to anyone

I agree- I can't think of anything more pointless or strange to do with my time.

Quote :

and the Sims 2 (really)

Now there is a game that should not be sold to kids! I somehow got into the Sims and was shocked to see you could make your sims 'make out' and there was even a life goal to sleep with as many different sims as possible.

Yes, you will get people who buy them underage - but that is pretty much policeable. What is harder is when other parents don't care and then your child gets to see them. I'd bet there's not many parents would feel comfortable about demanding to know from the other kids parents just what games are being played at that house.

Yeah I don't think I would like asking another parent what games my child would be playing and I don't know for sure how I would react if asked myself.

Some of the parents of the kids I work with are as obsessed as the kids are with games consoles. There is one couple in particular who don't even look up from the TV screen when staff go to make a home visit. I get the impression they wouldn't notice if their kids were playing one of their games that wasn't suitable.

But the unenforceable things such as playing at a friends house it the same with movies on DVD. A parent buys a scary movie, the kid watches it another time.

And the only thing wrong with the Sims is that you can take away the blur covers their nudity with a cheat

This hasn't been doing well in the US either, as it has been given an Adult Only rating (the highest rating which is very rare) and Sony/Nintendo won't allow it on their systems, banning it in the US

They're not even allowing it? That will annoy RockStar even more, not something SONY wants to do. Last time they done that they lost the exclusivity of GTA.

Before RockStar could have just appealed or editted it. And for Nintendo i think this was te game to show that nintendo wasn't just for kids.

Unless Rockstar wins the appeal to change the rating to a lower Mature rating, US people won't be seeing Manhunt 2 either. Like you said, this isn't going to help Sony's friendship with Rockstar. As for Nintendo, they are always going to be kids inside. Surprised they are letting Capcom remake Resident Evil 4 for the Wii.

Resident Evil 4 is fantastic though And Resi 4 was originally nintendo anyway and will help boost sales.

If RockStar emigrate over to XBox SONY truly are messed up completely since GTA is gameselling. Though i doubt they would. Microsoft pulled out of puttiny Canis Canem Edit on Xbox so i doubt RockStar are friendly with them either.

Yep, maybe they'll ship to Nintendo, if Rockstar don't frighten the big kids.

We'll see how this effects GTA4 in terms of which console it's on.

GTAIV has been built up through the PS3 so they wont cancel it, they will lose enough from Manhunt. Though GTAV, who knows.

Get rid. My ex was stalked (not by me) and it messed her up for ages. One in eight women are harrssed like this and its even higher in gay circles. Lets stop pushing the boundaries and just concentrating on improving gameplay.

I reckon that another reason it's been banned so the incident with the first game doesn't happen again. If i remember correctly, someone murdered their friend because they copied moves off the original Manhunt, which resulted in it being banned i think.

Stunt read my first post it explains that newspapers took that theory though in reality police said the intention was robbery and was not due to the game :S

Ziggy! wrote:

Get rid. My ex was stalked (not by me) and it messed her up for ages. One in eight women are harrssed like this and its even higher in gay circles. Lets stop pushing the boundaries and just concentrating on improving gameplay.

That is ignorant. That seems like you assume that just because it is violent, it is not a good game. Sure, violence is not needed for a good game but it is different. So many games are the same now it is nice to see something both good and different. RockStar does focus on gameplay and get constantly high sales and scores but a company needs to focus on something and each game needs to have a theme. A violent game can be good and is. Resident Evil 4 for example is considered (on of) the best of all games and was voted game of the year.

Was stalking down to a game? You do not explain and i do not see how this relates to the game.

butters wrote:

Stunt read my first post it explains that newspapers took that theory though in reality police said the intention was robbery and was not due to the game :S

whoops sorry didn't see that