Time to bee HEard players from the UK!

[Nick_i_am]

But pushing borderline people over the edge? That's the issue, and, if true, is the only reason I would support censorship of this or anything else on a 'domestic' level.

 

Of course, i'd rather support getting those people off the edge.

Edited July 6, 2007 by Nick_i_am

[Sand]

Its still the choice of the person to go over that edge or not. Free will, Nick. Its a bitch.

[Xard]

Unlike poison, Mnahunt 2 will not hurt anyone. It's a game. It's not real. It's not gonna drive *anyone* who plays it to violence. Just because someone plays Manhunt 2, and then commits violence doens't mean the game made them do it. Chances are soemthing else caused the person tobecome violent.

 

It be like someone watching Price Is Right then going out to commit robbery, and then someone blaming POR causing the person to commit robbery by showing others getting rich by 'playing a game' and making viewers jelaous. It's ludicrous!

 

Games do NOT turn otherwise peaceful people into violent pyschopaths. Period.

 

That still does not mean game can't be the catalyst, geez

[seejai]

welllll if someone is super weak minded and has a mental illness they might turn into pysco killer . i guess we're not talking about it. i am against the govt interfering with something like that but im more against the gaming industry coming out with such distaful games. when we play video games we do it bc its something we cant do in real life. like maybe slam dunk or go into the star wars world. thats why alot of ppl like rpgs so much . if we are putting humans on the same leval as monsters that we slaughter in video games i think that theres someting wrong with that. i know its not real but hey if aliens and humans are the same to u why not just kill aliens.... this prolly isnt making much sense lol

[Nick_i_am]

So you think the industry should be self-regulating enough that governments wouldn't have to step in?

[seejai]

it would be nice if they could be trusted enough so that bans dont have to be made.... i think there needs to be a bit more of a moral line. i guess thats why its rated for adults. i just dont think that the video game is the greatest idea if we are now entertaining ourselves by trying to kill ppl in a video game ( well i mean if thats one of the main objectives. theres killing in most games obvioiusly). doesnt seem like it should be very entertaining. i maybe shouldnt talk. ill admit ive never played the game. it just doesnt sound ike something i wanto

[Tale]

Weren't comics self-regulated a while back because of a supposed threat to society until Marvel dropped it?

Edited July 6, 2007 by Tale

[seejai]

i can see why a govt would get mad bc its encouraging things that are illegal but in a slightly more realistic sense (than say kotor) and with killing methods a bit more gruesom than by a blaster

Edited July 6, 2007 by seejai

[Morgoth]

Oh well I don't need that forced regulation nonsense. I wouldn't buy Manhunt 2 anyways due to it's tasteless content, but that's up to the person to decide, not the government. Nobody forces anyone to buy that garbage.

[seejai]

Weren't comics self-regulated a while back because of a supposed threat to society until Marvel dropped it?

 

im not really saying someone could get hurt.. like i said -it just seems distasteful. i guess if it appeals to u... but there are much better things they can do with a video game

[seejai]

Oh well I don't need that forced regulation nonsense. I wouldn't buy Manhunt 2 anyways due to it's tasteless content, but that's up to the person to decide, not the government. Nobody forces anyone to buy that garbage.

 

ya i think the govt should stay out of it. it just seems like it should be below the gaming industry

[Pop]

Once again, what do children have to do with it? If we just assume children will get their hands on everything, we shouldn't have R-rated movies or pornography of any kind.

 

This has nothing to do with children except to the ignorant who automatically think video game = toy.

 

And you're underplaying the meaning of education. Education doesn't mean a "a healthy dose of fatherly "be careful now."" Read what I said, I talked about teaching it like we teach math and science. We don't educate people on copyright either and we see a massive tons of ignorance about what that FBI warning means. Teaching social responsibility needs to be more than just a warning label. We can expect people by the time they're 18 (assuming they don't drop out) to add 2+2 and spell 'house' we should be able to expect them to act with a remote amount of intelligence and social responsibility.

It's mighty progressive to think of gaming as being beyond mere play, but that's what it is. Play. And as such, obviously the thrust of the industry will go towards young consumers, that's just good business. And to someone like me, who doesn't really recognize games as high art by and large, gratuitous amounts of hyper-realistic violence, or depictions of necrophilia, aren't things worth defending on principle, and the vast majority of the time they don't serve a purpose. So if the gov't wants to stamp it out, fine. Games don't grow on trees, they aren't drugs. If a moratorium on hyperviolence in video games is enacted it's not as if a huge black market on violent video games will arise. Games are expensive to make and are meant for mass consumption. Thus gov't intervention is as effective, if not more, as market forces in regulating the content of video games.

 

So if it's not some warning, what is it then? You're actually suggesting education in the literal sense? Are we going to have sensitivity classes that you can take when you're 18 to earn the right to play games? Are we going to have gaming licenses? If not, what good would these classes do?

Edited July 6, 2007 by Pop

[Tale]

It's mighty progressive to think of gaming as being beyond mere play, but that's what it is. Play. And as such, obviously the thrust of the industry will go towards young consumers, that's just good business.

By this reasoning, Vegas gambling is thrust towards young consumers. Because that's just play. However, there's a distinction between young play and adult play. Just as their's a distinction between children websites and adult websites, children magazines and adult magazines, childrens books and adult books, children's movies and adult movies. It must be mighty progressive to think of entertainment, in general, as beyond mainly for children, then.

 

If not, what good would these classes do?

What good do math, english, and science classes do? If we're terrified that games, books, TVs, and movies will teach anti-social behaviors to the point that just banning them is considered a viable option, then it behooves society to attempt to teach the pro-social ones.

Edited July 6, 2007 by Tale

[Pop]

Math, english, and science classes are supposed to impart applicable skills on students. Is the implication that as long as we teach "pro-social" skills, "anti-social" elements and media are acceptable? That doesn't really follow.

[Tale]

Math, english, and science classes are supposed to impart applicable skills on students. Is the implication that as long as we teach "pro-social" skills, "anti-social" elements and media are acceptable? That doesn't really follow.

"Anti-social" elements and media are already acceptable. American Psycho, the works of Eli Roth, heck Tarantino may be "artsy" but it's still violent enough to be considered anti-social, half the movies from David Fincher. Even Great Expectations can be considered anti-social yet is acceptable. Hell, the nightly news. Teaching pro-social skills and knowledge is an attempt to teach people how to deal appropriately with anti-social messages and to make educated choices about their actions along that spectrum.

 

It's fully applicable, especially in today's society. And a heck of a lot better than trying to censor media just because it has a chance of encouraging people to act contrary to what those in power in society believe to be in society's best interests.

Edited July 6, 2007 by Tale

[Pop]

Isn't pro-social education just an analogue to censorship in that it encourages people to act according with what those in power in society believe to be in society's best interest? I still don't see what's so defensible about Manhunt 2 that this "education" would be preferable.

[Guest Jy Kon Star]

I went to study the content of the Manhunt & Manhunt 2. The story concept has been done time & time again hunting a human for sport like in that Ice Tea movie, don't know the title. As for the violence in the games the first Manhunt trailer, didn't show much. Manhunt 2 was a little more detailed showing far more blood & violence & the hole engineering a weapon has been done time & time again that gets out of hand like Frankenstein. But the fact that this game is on the wii is what I don't get, Manhunt 2 has a M rating & isn't the wii made up of primaryly family titles such as Mario bro. stuff, Zelda & Meteoroid the most violent game I have ever known to be on a nintendo system is Resident Evil. So if I'm correct, isn't it some what like putting a Camile on a pack of cigarettes that was said to make children think it was ok to smoke because it was a cartoon character. I just don't get also why it wouldn't be on 360, isn't 360 more so advertised to 16 to 26 year olds? But other then this game lacking any orginiality, it is no more violent then Saw.

 

But children aside, I see no difference in Nazis burning books & Novels, Movies, & Games being censored or band from Adults. there I said it...

[seejai]

i think killing ppl with plastic bags is boring.....

[Tale]

Isn't pro-social education just an analogue to censorship in that it encourages people to act according with what those in power in society believe to be in society's best interest?

No. Because education is never analogue to censorship. They are complete opposites. Censorship does not actually encourage anything, it just tries to hide. If the fear is that a game is enough to make a person act anti-social on a societally unacceptable level, then obviously steps need to be made to reduce or offset that risk. Because it's not just Manhunt 2 that causes that risk.

 

I still don't see what's so defensible about Manhunt 2 that this "education" would be preferable.

You're confusing the event with the topic. I'm talking about censorship. If you can't see what's defensible about Manhunt 2 can you tell me what's defensible about Saw? Kill Bill? The nightly news? Great Expectations? The works of Socrates? Some of these you may be able to answer. Some of them you won't be able to without an argument that could defend Manhunt 2.

 

Putting quote tags around education does not change it from being education. If encouraging anti-social behavior is not defensible, then obviously encouraging pro-social behavior must be.

[Hurlshort]

Jy Kon made a very good point about the Wii being more marketed towards families. I agree with that being similiar to the controversy over the Marlboro camel.

 

Tale, I've already explained the differences between Kill Bill and a game like Manhunt. I'm not saying it's not a thin line between art and exploitive violence, but the line is there. And the general public makes it pretty clear when it is crossed, which it has with Manhunt 2. It's not like one country is banning the game, multiple institutions have come to the same conclusion, the game is trash.

[seejai]

also there was a murder that was supposively linked to the game

[Tale]

I'm not saying it's not a thin line between art and exploitive violence, but the line is there.

And I'm not saying they're wrong for banning Manhunt. I'm saying the reasoning is subjective and the belief that censorship is necessary is idiotic. The "a line must be drawn" thing is nonsense and applies more against censorship than it ever did in favor of it.

 

also there was a murder that was supposively linked to the game

There were suicides supposedly linked to the news reports of Marilyn Munroe's suicide. The problem isn't Manhunt 2.

Edited July 7, 2007 by Tale

[seejai]

depending on the persons mental state it could. some of the methods used in the murder were the same i think

[Nick_i_am]

Manhunt 2 was developed for the Wii, that doesn't mean it's ever going to be released for it.

[Tale]

depending on the persons mental state it could. some of the methods used in the murder were the same i think

Read up more on violence linked to the media. There have been crimes linked to everything from Schwarzenager, nightly news, comic books, about every form of media that features action, violence, or even real world events. Some of it erroneous, some of it plausible. The problem isn't Manhunt.