digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

BBFC responds to Destructoid editor regarding Manhunt 2 banning

destructoid.com — "You've all heard about the outrageous banning of Manhunt 2 by the British Board of Film Classification, as announced yesterday. You should also all be aware by now that European members of the Destructoid community have had enough and will soon mount our official response very, very soon. The news has lit a fire underneath me, as it has my..."

Who dugg this? Made popular Jun 21, 2007

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

63 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • kelbear, on 10/11/2007, -0/+20The AO rating is appropriate, but banning AO games period is ***** stupid.

    AO = Adults only!
    And apparently, even adults can't have access?

    We Don't Want Anybody To Have Access = WDWATHA != AO.

    How does banning this from adults protect children? They're a bunch of idiots.
  • drlha, on 10/11/2007, -1/+13theg2: No the BBFC banned it. You're thinking of the Americans who gave it a "Adults Only" rating (which is really a ban except on paper because no one will touch a "AO" game), the "B" in BBFC stands for "British".
  • sugarazor, on 10/11/2007, -2/+13This is about the British Board of Film Classification outright banning the game - that IS censorship. For Christ's sake, they were originally called the British Board of Film Censors. This isn't about Sony and Nintendo refusing to license the game or it getting an AO rating in America - this is a government agency banning a piece of media. HUGE difference.

    EDIT
    What he said!
  • inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+12I care that you guys don't care. You should care, really.
  • NGliam, on 10/11/2007, -6/+16Hmm.. he has a good point in that if no harm was brought to the testers then why should it be justifiable to not certify it; though some user comments regard it as though even if there was any psychological damage to the testers then it would need to warrant serious psychological treatment to be noteworthy. As I'm writing this I remember a quote from this month (or maybe last months) UK issue of OPS2 magazine, in which one of the writers states that he seriously had nightmares after playing Manhunt 2 - I was going to say that any negative psychological effects should supposedly be worthy of banning, but I consider nightmares to be a psychological disorder even if they are temporary. On this note it is generally thought or publicised that horror films should give you nightmares, does this mean that we should not view them? I can't help think this is going to spark a rather large censorship debate, and in some ways I hope so, I already noticed this morning that the front page story on the "Metro" newspaper (free on UK buses/trains) was this Manhunt 2 censorship although they didn't really go into any detail.

    My opinion is that no fictional media should be 'banned' as the current rating system, if properly enforced - which unarguably is near impossible to do so with parents buying games for their children and such - already allows the view to know whether the content of the video game/film they are purchasing is suitable. If a person is psychologically (there is that word again) unstable then it is surely not the fault of the developers or distributors if they are mentally harmed by their experience.

    I'm also a fan of the original Manhunt, despite being 16 years old (a fine example of the failings of the rating systems, although I'm mentally stable and if my parents did not believe so then they would stop me playing games of this nature to the best of their power) and not solely for the 'killing emulator' concept - I found the game to be quite unique and engaging. Anyway, I was looking forward to Manhunt 2 and will be quite annoyed if it is not released.. there shall always be hope.

    Edit: I can't find the link to the BBFC press release on their decision, I guess I aren't very good at navigating their site. Would be much appreciated if someone posted a link, thanks :)
  • relaxeder, on 04/17/2009, -5/+14I wish people could become outraged with this much zeal over something that matters.
  • NyteStarNyne, on 10/11/2007, -5/+14FREE MANHUNT!!
  • sugarazor, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11To those saying it's an overreaction or you wish people cared this much about something that matters - why doesn't this? Just because it's a video game? First, you give your government the right to ban video games, then you give them the right to ban certain radio and television shows. Then it's cable television and satellite radio. Then it's movies. Then it's DVDs. Then it's music. Then it's fiction books. Then it's non-fiction books that contain facts they don't like. Then it's newspapers reporting critical stories.

    Give away a little freedom, watch what happens.

    I'm not particularly worried about how it's being handled in America. It's stupid and a double-standard, but it's all being done by private organizations. This is the government - that's a scary slippery slope to go down.
  • UglyShirts, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7Jim Sterling is a grade-A ponce. He used to get in little pissing matches with me on a board where we were both admins, until he got banned. I'd mod something, he'd whine line a whiny whiner, and cry until long after people stopped listening. This is just more of the same. "Oh, I have personally been so horribly slighted, and this injustice cannot stand because it's all about me." Shut the hell up, Alice.

    That's not to say he isn't mostly right, here...I just wish that once in awhile he could write something where his tone doesn't decisively indicate to anyone reading just how very much he thinks of himself, while simultaneously painting him like the infant he's always been.

    So, I think I'll buy TWO copies. :)
  • Fafnir43, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7If freedom of expression (and impingements thereon) don't matter, what does?
  • drlha, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7The BBFC already has the ability to ban Movies and DVDs. They used to ban movies all the time, but now movies are an "Accepted artform" they don't tend to do that any more. In 20 years time I hope the same will be true of Video Games, but right now the BBFC is just responding to what they know will be a tabloid ***** if they didn't ban it.

    Frankly their actions suck, but this isn't the slippery slope, its just the "old guys" not understanding whatever the latest "new fangled entertainment that is destroying our children" is. It used to be movies, before that it was rock and roll, before that it was comics.
  • catalysis, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7Thats funny, I was going to say his letter to the BBFC reads like a 12-year old wrote it. I agree with his point, but there is surely a better way to argue it.
  • sugarazor, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Oh my God, a well thought-out counterpoint. Thank you.

    But it still worries me that they even have the ability to ban a movie if they so desired. And I'm just waiting for the day when it comes across the Pond to the States.
  • sugarazor, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6It's not about whether or not it's a good game.
  • sugarazor, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5The quality is irrelevant. This is a government organization saying what is and isn't appropriate... that's appalling. On the American side of things, we have a ratings system that is essentially the same as the MPAA's where AO games (or NC17 movies) are cut off at the knees before even given a chance to make money because retailers refuse to stock the games and Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft all refuse to license them. It is certainly their right to refuse a license, but then what's the point of an AO rating in the first place? And what makes this game even remotely close to what can be easily watched in a theater or on DVD? How can a pixelated game be any more graphic than what is seen in the Hostel or Saw movies where real people are being depicted as victims to violence and brutality?

    The point is the double standard that video games face because they are perceived as toys for children despite the average player being 30 years old. Movies get away with much more and are released in theaters, unrated DVDs are sold in most major retailers, but video games are different. Why?
  • kag9000, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5The BBFC has made a political decision to ban this game.

    Exactly the same thing happened in the Eighties with Video as a consequence of widely available cheap video recorders.

    The UK ban, started by media barons and attention whore MP's, didn't think it was right that the proles should be allowed access to pornographic, graphic horror or violent videos, and banned such classics as the Evil Dead, Brain Dead, Texas Chainsaw Massacre and countless zombie films Lest it turned us all into ravaging-shagging, chainsaw-wielding-zombie-savages causing the collapse of social order. So an orchestrated moral panic was instigated via a media meme,

    Yet again the Government, it's censors and the clipboard fetishist lackies think we aren't adult enough to discern reality and fiction - and have the right to choose for ourselves what we watch and play.

    Unfortunately for them, we have different means of distribution to access, thus bypassing their pathetic attempts at bossing us around.

    I wonder what is going to happen when they try to censor the internet? They will, it's pretty much a certainty.
  • xerus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5The first point is the double standard applied to video games vs. other forms of media. If this were a movie, then it would be released without a problem.

    The second point is that if they are able to easily get away with this kind of censorship now, then it will be much easier for them each time they do it again in the future.
  • TheG2, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4My mistake, I was in the wrong article (theres so many of them right now).
  • Fafnir43, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3This is all about the fight. If it was a game about being a Nazi, I'd be on the same side. (Don't get me wrong - I'd be urging boycotts of any retailers who would actually *stock* the thing, staging protests outside the company headquarters, and generally making life hell for the producers of the game to the full extent of my ability. But I'd still be against government intervention.)

    Edit: And if it hadn't been banned, I wouldn't have bought it.
  • sharod, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2The best quote I've read regarding Manhunt 2:

    “You can use a saw blade and cut upward into a foe’s groin and buttocks, motioning forward and backward with the Wii remote as you go.”

    Hahaha
  • sugarazor, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2But even if it sucks, that shouldn't affect its ability to make money. It's kinda like 2 Live Crew back in the early 90s, sure, I thought the music sucked, but it's their right to suck!
  • Bonzodog, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2This game has *also* been banned in the Republic of Ireland as well, and people are predicting that a Domino Effect will take place across Europe. That could very realistically see the game banned all the way across Europe.
  • Jagdwulfe, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Ban Mario and free MANHUNT!!!!
  • SpikeZ, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Here is the BBFC press release:
    (Click on June 19th - BBFC Rejects Video Game Manhunt 2)
    http://www.bbfc.co.uk/news/pressnews.php

  • gdgi, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2'sure' you're mentally stable. how can you possibly give yourself that assessment? is ANYONE truly capable of assessing themselves?
  • Osjpr, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"It's obviously over-the-top, not to mentioned mindless so it deserves to be banned."
    You must be religious, or 10 years old.

    "Make a better game and we might care."
    You haven't played it yet.
  • twigboy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1one of which may be the impeachment of Bush?
  • UglyShirts, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Honestly. And way to say "principal" when you meant "principle", Mr. British Editor.
  • DCintheUK, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Quote : "Now if you'll excuse me, I have a game to import."... classic...

    My version? "Now if you'll excuse me, I have a game to download."

  • Osjpr, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"Taboo’ themes are
    acceptable, but not if their treatment is likely to
    encourage harm to viewers or, through their behaviour,
    to society."

    That is bs. plain and simple.
  • cresswga, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Just to add to that - I do not know what is in the game but this is the BBFC's guidlines for rejection which I just pulled from their site:

    Rejects
    The Board will attempt to deal with films, videos or
    DVDs which are unacceptable at any category through
    intervention such as making cuts or requiring the
    addition of warning captions. If this is not possible or
    not acceptable to the distributor, works may be
    refused classification altogether. ‘Taboo’ themes are
    acceptable, but not if their treatment is likely to
    encourage harm to viewers or, through their behaviour,
    to society. The following are of particular concern

    * graphic rape or torture
    * sadistic violence or terrorisation
    * illegal and glamorised drug use
    * material likely to incite racial hatred or violence
    * portrayals of children in a sexualised or
    abusive context
    * sex accompanied by non-consensual pain, injury
    or humiliation
    * material likely to be found obscene by the courts.
  • cresswga, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Despite this decision I still think that Britain has one of the best classification systems. Unlike the MPAA they have all of their standards published and viewable by the public and by film makers so they are not held to ransom by faceless censors and rules that are not written down.

    Sure it sucks for this game but the board in recent years had made great steps towards reversing the crappy decisions made in the past over a lot of horror films. And at least the British classifications keep children out of movies like Hostel 2.

    So perfect? No. But a lot better than it could be/used to be.
  • QEDbitches, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2"Putting Manhunt 2 on the Wii would be like trying to broadcast Hostel 2 on a children's TV channel"

    That's a freaking amazing/fitting analogy.

    Alas, there are more than prepubescent girls that own a Wii and we must respect their right to play over the top killing games. And even if you don't care about them, realize that this banning could be the start to a slippery slope of video game double standards.
  • Osjpr, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I can't believe what some people will try and pass as logic. NO ONE IS FORCING YOU TO BUY MANHUNT 2. If you don't buy the game, you won't be viewing the 'objectionable' content!
  • WoollyMittens, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Apart from "Man Hunt", the only banned media I can recall is "Hitler A., Mein Kampf".

    I don't think they're in the same league.
  • MurphyWatson, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1If there intent was that the game not reach a certain audience, ***** like this fails hard. Its just turning into a collector's item, and attracting far more attention than it would have on its own.
  • kelbear, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1This is true. It's a pretty ***** game. There's no violence in games for me, only gameplay which may be dressed up in "violence" as a setting. And at its core, Manhunt was just a heavily heavily dumbed down splinter-cell knock-off, but instead of grabbing guards and knocking them out, you enter pre-made kill animations. Whoop de ***** doo. Violence doesn't excite me nor does it disgust me. It "nothings" me, leaving this game filled with mostly nothing.
  • Tapewormz, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Meh, if anything...This is probably the best thing that could have happend to Manhunt 2. Now everyone will want the game even more. They'll get it, even if they have to import it to do so. It'll also be a huge download on the torrents I'm assuming.

    Probably the best promotion this game could have gotten was getting banned. BANNED = FTW.
  • sathias, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1It's more about where the line is going to be drawn more than anything. Only the most extreme and dogmatic supporter of freedom of expression could say there should be no line drawn at all.
  • Kinneas12, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Again, I'm simply asking. Does anyone actually care about the game or is this all about the fight? Would we all be defending the game right now if it was about being a Nazi trying to see how many Jews you can kill?
  • CyberBlade, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Dugg for Honour!
  • Kinneas12, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Okay I completely respect and understand that. Is anyone going to buy the game though? Go on the website, it looks absolutely terrible. Everything in the videos cry 1999. That's just my opinion, at least. I guess there are some people who still play Coleco Vision.

    I just think people should pick good fights or it looks like they're standing up for something that is a piece of steaming crap. The only reason I ever heard of this game was because of the controversy.
  • Bob042, on 10/11/2007, -4/+4I honestly can't say I've ever read something particularly useful or entertaining from destructoid, and this is no different.
  • robuk24, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Putting Manhunt 2 on the Wii would be like trying to broadcast Hostel 2 on a children's TV channel. As much as censorship sucks its hardly surprising!
  • Dezlab, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0The fact is that the government has the right to ban, or not allow, a video game in their country. That doesn't sound very democratic to me, regardless of the content.

    And what makes even more mad is that Sony, with there declining sales, is stupid enough to not support the game. Possibly losing rights to future Rock Star hit titles.
  • gamebittk, on 10/11/2007, -8/+7Best comment from the article's page:
    "I'm shocked that he didn't reply with "Who the ***** is Jim Sterling?""
  • Puffball, on 10/11/2007, -6/+5Whoo, for a second I thought this Jim Sterling was freeing black slaves from their shackles, but he's really sending melodramatic emails to some guy about Manhunt 2. I don't think Manhunt 2 should be banned either, but emailing the BBFC is both a waste of time and a publicity stunt that complements Destructoid's usual sensationalism.
  • HanSolo69, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2Man, Sterling really made it a point to try and come off as almost *more* of a self-aggrandizing whiny bitch than Jack Thompson.
    I hadn't heard anything about this game until this whole thing with the ratings started. Rockstar games have always been mediocre novelties anyways, so I don't think this will be much of a loss if nobody gets to play it.
  • spawnfree, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2i remember a time before video games, but i don't like to.
    i like games.
    But i couldn't care less for this reprehensible title, or the original.

    now if it was GTA4 being banned i mite get angry.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 64 of 64 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.