You probably haven’t played it, right?
Trust me, it is very different from any other game out there.
I did a bit, but I literally felt dirty after it.
I only once had that feeling before, after seeing a muslim girl getting stoned (not the nice dope-stoned but the one with the big rocks).
Maybe I am just becoming soft in my old age. 
Ah, you haven’t read the thread, Scoundrel. Want to talk after you do that? Looking forward to it.
It won’t be on the Wii - it has been given an AO rating in the US, so Nintendo will not allow it. Nor will Sony.
Rockstar have created a game with apparently average gameplay, no redeeming features AND ensured that it will not end up on popular consoles - smart move.
Si
No, the alcohol waits until after the guns are safely locked away, for the record. 
I’d hardly say that I have a “Vested Interest” in the continued existence of Hunting Games (which, for the record, bear very little in common with actual hunting besides firing a gun at an animal)- but yes, I am a hunter, and I’m curious as to why you seem to feel the mere existence of a game in which you shoot deer or whatever should be seen as objectionable.
I did read the thread :rolleyes:, I just don’t understand that someone who has played the game seriously considered it similar to something like Metal Gear Solid.
You don’t see the difference?
Then there isn’t much point in talking to you any further.
I didn’t think Manhunt was radically different from Metal Gear Solid or the Splinter Cell games except maybe in execution. What do you do in Splinter Cell? You sneak around in dark places, take people by surprise, and you can either snap their necks, shoot them, or knock them out. Splinter Cell isn’t as graphic but some of the game play elements are pretty similiar. Though I prefer Splinter Cell.
Marc
But the execution (pun intended) is what the game is all about.
The point I was making, Scoundrel, is that I have played the game. I said that in post #10. If you had read the thread, you wouldn’t have had to make any assumptions about whether I played it or not.
Okay. I don’t agree with you so there’s no point in talking to me.
While I disagree with you in principle, I can live with your conclusion. I mean, it does free me up from having to decide if and how I should respond to some of your statements. Like this one, for example: “I am not sure what my point is, but I do think the industry needs to think about what they release.”
Fair enough.
I don’t see how someone who played Manhunt and Metal Gear Solid can’t see what they have in common. You sneak around and kill or incapacitate people in both games. Manhunt is more graphic, certainly, but the basic style of game play isn’t all that far off. Heck, in Splinter Cell: Pandora’s Box you’re ordered to kill an unarmed woman at one point while in Israel.
Where is the cut off between the game you think violent enough to be banned and one that is just violent enough?
Marc
Sorry if I came off snarky, was just having a bit of a bad day, but I did read the thread, I just didn’t scroll back to see who made which comment.
I think the killing in Metal Gear Solid is a means to and end.
It looks like in ManHunt the killing is the end.
I think the cut off is where a game is just sadism, versus a game where you perform violent actions as a means to an end.
Am I really the only one who just feels that ManHunt is just… wrong, maybe even evil?
Don’t you think the industry should protect itself against people like… well, me in this instance, by thinking twice before they create a game like this which in most peoples eye will have no redeeming value whatsoever?
Once again, I am not trying to pick a fight, I am just really curious if I am the only one who was left with a bad taste after playing the first few levels of ManHunt 1.
Thanks, Scoundrel. That’s cool.
You’re not the only person who felt that way. The reviewer from XBox Mag slammed the game for exactly that reason. He gave it like a 4.5 just because he hated the concept and thought it was sick and disgusting. He had nothing to say about the controls, physics, graphics, audio, etc.
But a lot of us enjoyed the twisted nature of the game. It was different; creepy. And, though you may not agree, there is a lot of humor in it.
I just don’t see much difference between this game and a lot of others in the sense that killing other people is an integral part of the game. If someone is opposed to that, that’s one thing. But to say that one game presents the actual act of committing murder in such a way that it is more dangerous than another game doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.
As for redeeming value… do any of the games mentioned have some sort of redeeming social or other value except as entertainment?
That is actually a good question and I have to say “No, not really”.
That is why I can see that banning will not be a good idea.
It will create a slippery slope and next time they will come after “my” games, like Grand Theft Auto.
Bottom line is that I just felt icky after playing ManHunt, like I felt after reading American Psycho.
And don’t get me wrong : I am against all banning of books.
I think “Mein Kampf” should actually be available for everybody so they can have a clear glimpse of insanity and what hatred of groups of people can cause.
RockStar is either being stupid, creating a game like this which will probably hurt the industry, or are really trying to fight the good fight by getting people to think about if and why we should treat games differently than other media.
Like I said : I am not 100% sure where I stand just yet, but I do understand the want to ban this particular game.
The idea that killing people = entertainment value disturbs me a bit.
It’s kind of like slasher movies, where people get gruesomely killed for your entertainment. Is it possible for a healthy person to enjoy watching something like that? I think it is, as long as they can keep in mind that it’s only a movie—they haven’t completely suspended their disbelief, and they know that no one is really being killed or tortured. I do not think it’s possible for a psychologically and morally healthy person to enjoy watching people getting horribly killed in reality.
Nobody gets very upset over cartoon violence, in movies or video games, because it so obviously isn’t real. Even a child easily keep in mind that what’s happening on screen isn’t reality. The more graphically realistic the violence gets, though, the harder it is to make that distinction on a gut level, even though intellectually you know it’s just a game/movie/whatever.
See, whereas I have never had the slightest bit of difficulty making that distinction on either an intellectual or a visceral level. It’s fake. I can see Jennifer Love Hewitt pretend to get stabbed a hundred times and pretend to die and then flick channels and three seconds later see her on that stupid ghost show, obviously not dead. In a video game, it’s even easier - what you’re seeing has never actually happened; the pixels appearing on your screen bear no relationship to anything in real life. I can’t understand the idea that it’s difficult to distinguish; I just can’t.
And, I mean, the same argument could be made against showing graphic depictions of, say, grief. I’d argue that anyone who derives entertainment out of watching a real-life man dissolve into helpless sobs over the death of a loved one was a ghoul and a freak. But we give awards to people who pretend to do that sort of thing on screen, and no one ever suggests that it’s hard to make a distinction between the two things, no matter how realistic and skilled the portrayal.
You’re not the only one for whom Manhunt left a bad taste in their mouth and I won’t knock you for it because each one of us has our limits. I would argue that in Manhunt the violence committed is certainly a means to an end. James Cash, the protagonist, simply wants to survive. Generally speaking, Manhunt received decent reviews which indicates to me that there’s more to the game then just violence and gore. It might not be your cup of tea but I don’t see anything wrong or evil about it.
marc
Maybe the game is sick, maybe it has no value other than shock, maybe it has graphic images that a lot of people find disturbing. But this is 2007 and the UK, from what I hear, claims to be a modern democracy. Here’s the rub: artistic censorship is barbarian. Thread over.
modern democracy yes
modern liberal democracy - not so much.
I’m not crying over Manhunt - it’s not art. And I think that films like Hostel and Kill Bill should have been banned, too. Nasty and pointless.
But Hot Fuzz is great.
Si