What is Digg?94 Comments
- Detritus, on 11/14/2007, -3/+39I totally see where you're coming from but I think you're missing an important bit to understanding morality. It is certainly within the rights of the retailer to observe their own sense of morality, I wouldn't advocate a Christian Book store being ridiculed for not including books on Qabala. At the same time I wouldn't fault people for pointing out ignorance in a hypocritical moral stance. If a Christian Book store featured some kind of quasi-Christian Yoga book, but didn't carry a more traditional Yoga book with relevant Vedic scripture it would be laughable and the "moral right" of anyone to laugh at them for it. See also: Christian Metal.
All this hooey is ridiculous; if Target sells the Saw movies on DVD any moral stance against Manhunt 2 is equally laughable and it is an exercise of the authors morality to call them out on it. - lacronicus, on 11/14/2007, -24/+53Wait, so the owner of a store taking a moral stand against something is ignorant and ridiculous? If anything, I find it to be commendable, because it means that, despite being a money-making company, the owners still put their own personal morals above their wish for money. I personally don't care about video game violence, and though I don't particularly care for a game that centers around killing people just for the sake of it, I won't say that you shouldn't be able to. However, as long as it's not the government doing it, I'm all for letting people restrict it as they see fit. If a retailer doesn't think it right to carry pornography, should they be ridiculed? If they refuse to carry guns or knives because they feel they do society no good, should they be called ignorant? Sure, they are all different scenarios, but they are still products, and it only seems reasonable that the owners of a company should be able to police the products their company sells.
I think the real problem here is that the writer expects someone to step in and tell the owner that they can't do that. Who or what has the power to do such a thing? The government? I doubt it, since although people like their violent video games, people like a less influential government a whole lot more. - aliengoods, on 11/13/2007, -0/+22It's not just the Saw movies. They actually sell saws!
- Sirocco, on 11/13/2007, -4/+19Typical American retail knee-jerk reaction. Movie publishers are more than happy to offer up "unrated" DVDs but video game publishers won't touch a game unless it has been rated. The failure here is on multiple levels, not just at retail.
- lnxfi, on 11/13/2007, -0/+9"it means that, despite being a money-making company, the owners still put their own personal morals above their wish for money"
I'd say it's more likely that the guys at the top said, "Uh oh. We got a whole lot of angry soccer moms. Better pull it before they go to Walmart." - typicalusername, on 11/14/2007, -2/+11Well, I think the point that the author is missing, is that the original nudity content/and violence were removed, but with the hack you can re-add it. A parent may not have a problem with the content as is, but would with the things it adds with the hack. Although, it's their business, they should be able to do whatever the hell they want. Also, who the hell buys their games at Target anyway? They rarely get them on release day!
- NSMike, on 11/14/2007, -2/+10The cry of "it is my right to buy what I want to buy!" doesn't really apply here. It's Target's right to sell what they want to sell. If it is for sale elsewhere, then it is the consumer's job, not the retailer's, to find it where it is available and purchase it. No store is under any obligation to sell anything. Imagine if, since it is my right to buy what I want to buy, I was to demand that Target carry every type of, for example, carpet cleaner. There are different reasons for not doing so, but the results are the same. I can't buy my favorite brand of carpet cleaner there, but then again, Target's not obligated to sell it. So I have to go to some specialty store to find it and get it that's a few miles down the road. So what?
Sure, their reasons are a bit inexplicable, but just as much as they have the right not to sell it there, you have the right to shop elsewhere. - p0tent1al, on 11/13/2007, -1/+8The problem is that companies paint this visage like they want to serve the people, but really they look out only for their best interests. Also the fact that they sell movies that are more violent than that calls ***** on their whole "morality" stance, but big retailers wouldn't ever come out and explain that away fully, because they don't give a *****. The MAIN reason why retailers restrict these games, is they know that a couple of powerful parental groups will boycott them and whoever allies with them, and it will receive media coverage and it can become very damaging, if FOX or ABC decide to run a story about how Target supports violent games like Manhunt 2. Throw in another school tragedy and have Manhunt be the cause about it, and you are looking at SERIOUS damage to any retailer.
They are not looking out for anyone else but themselves, and we as consumers should be pissed at all these groups, and these retailers. If you want to restrict the game, go ahead by all means, but don't ***** around the real reason for why your doing it. - disabled4diggin, on 11/13/2007, -2/+9I think its more a publicity issue than a morality one. Target is a huge company and they want to have a wholesome family image to attract their core consumer market. If they take a relatively microscopic hit economically by not selling Manhunt 2, they can strengthen their image while at the same time get more publicity. Their target market is the family, and if they upset some young, single males to strengthen their image to the family then they are making a smart decision. This issue is about corporate America, not about puritan, stuck-up America.
- Otto, on 11/14/2007, -2/+9>>>"Wait, so the owner of a store taking a moral stand against something is ignorant and ridiculous?"
Yes, they are. Take your argument to another level: Would you give props to a pharmacist who refused to sell birth control? Note that this is not a fictitious argument, such cases have actually occurred. Usually in towns where there's only one pharmacy.
Consider that not every town in the country has a multitude of selection. A large majority of the population does not have choice in where to shop. There are places that are 200+ miles away from a Best Buy or other big box store, so it's not like they can go buy the material elsewhere without a major commitment.
Of course, with online sales getting more popular, this is changing, but nevertheless it's still a bit of a shame when your retailer decides to dictate his morality to you. I don't dictate my moral code to anybody, I absolutely refuse to shop at a place that thinks it's acceptable for them to dictate their moral code to me. - Eivo, on 11/13/2007, -1/+8Target can do whatever the hell they want, period. The logic the author uses is asinine. I don't see Exxon selling Manhunt 2. That's becuase they can decide what to sell and what not to sell. While I disagree with Target's actions, I support the fact that they are allowed to do it. Target has to live with the consequences of their actions however, just don't shop at Target. It's that simple.
- norman619, on 11/13/2007, -0/+6Yes they are. The video game rating system is 100% voluntary just like the movie rating system. There is no law to prohibit such things. Such laws have been tried and found to be unconstitutional.
- TotalHalibut, on 11/14/2007, -0/+5No, you won't.
- SleepingOrange, on 11/14/2007, -1/+6Buried for being another manhunt 2 story.
Every business has the right to either sell or not sell whatever products it chooses.. Who frigging cares if its a violent computer game or a pair of socks made in taiwan?
You guys are just rediculous for caring so much about this. - norman619, on 11/13/2007, -0/+4Not everyone can afford to up and move as you suggest you moron.
- Jsmuli2, on 11/13/2007, -1/+5Sales and Image go hand in hand with retail. Of course Target will choose to not sell such games to make sure there are less ignorant, parents outside their store with signs protesting the sale of a video game.
But all in all this author forgets what freedom is, freedom is not just the choice of buying any game it's also the choice of selling or not selling any product. Just because Target and a few other stores stopped selling a game doesn't mean the game can't be bought somewhere else. In fact, stuff like this is actually supporting the gaming industry by having more people go to gamestop and EBgames to buy their "mature" rated games which then turns out to be the building grounds for store loyalty.
So this guy complains but it's wasted...what will get out of this? Nothing, Freedom is not only the choice to participate, but it is also the choice to not participate. (True Freedom that is) - NSMike, on 11/13/2007, -0/+4Nope. I was exposing the idea that a store must sell what I want for the fallacy that it is. Any piece of merchandise would've worked. Carpet cleaner just came to mind first. Stupid spaghetti stains...
- mstoneburner, on 11/14/2007, -0/+4What's up with all the walls of text in this thread? Brevity is the soul of wit, people.
- Hetman, on 11/13/2007, -0/+3This is not about sex this is about violence. As he stated the volience depecited in 300 by far surpasses the violence of manhunt. And the point he is making is that anyone can change the coding to a game and make it worst than it was before. And that is not the devolopers fault.
- Abomonog, on 11/13/2007, -1/+4Because they can't just remove the content. It's not like "Hot Coffee" where the models were reskinned for the mini-game The models and skinning and scripting in Manhunt 2 are not altered to make the banned content. They are merely rearranged. This means that the same models and scripts used to make the "banned" content are used in the rest of the game. Removing those would cause fatal errors in the game so the relevant parts are just skipped over.
- cwilson, on 11/13/2007, -0/+3I believe there is a barrier when talking about consoles though. Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think Microsoft, Sony, or Nintendo will license unrated games on their consoles. I could have sworn I read this during the original Manhunt 2 banning issue, but I can't find it now.
- voyvf, on 11/14/2007, -0/+3Holy crap. I'm definitely going to buy this game now! :D
- BearinG, on 11/14/2007, -0/+2I was asked for ID at Bestbuy when I bought Gears of War and Call of Duty 3.. im 24yo.
There's no reason why this has to be complicated. Same as video stores.. check the rating.. ask for ID. If that'll stop them from taking away "mature" games from me, why not? - Quaterni0n, on 11/13/2007, -1/+3Just be patient guys. This kind of BS will go away when the last of the baby boomers make it to nursing homes and the gaming generation assumes control. The people currently in power didn't grow up with this stuff. They don't understand it so they want to regulate it. Movies, rock & roll and comic books all had these problems in the past. It won't be long now - dementia is already taking hold of Jack Thompson.
- Abomonog, on 11/13/2007, -0/+2But Rockstar didn't mislead anyone. Even the ESRB cleared the game as it is now with the hidden content. And they knew about it.
- duffblue, on 11/13/2007, -0/+2Are video game publishers allowed to release unrated games? I don't know if there's restrictions or anything, I'm just asking.
- typicalusername, on 11/13/2007, -0/+2Hell, my Mom used to watch Zombie movies with me when I was 6. Thanks for making a "well adjusted individual" Mom!
- norman619, on 11/13/2007, -0/+2Does the game come with parental controls? I have been buying more games than usual this year and am surprised to find a new option in the game settings. Some games are actually allowing parents to lock some features out in games. This is a very positive move on their part. All games should have this option available for those with children.
- squison, on 11/13/2007, -0/+2Content removed or not, what parent is buying this game for their kid? Does the big M on the front of the box mean nothing?
- norman619, on 11/13/2007, -0/+2Believe it or not, some kids can actually tell the difference between the simulated violence in video games and the real thing. Most have seen much worse on TV and movies anyway. I'd readily buy it for my kids to play. Heck I'd play the game with them. It's a game. Try to remember that.
- Rahodeb, on 11/13/2007, -2/+4You're missing the point of capitalism. If he refuses to sell it, and there is a demand, then there is an opening for someone else to sell it and make money. Besides, with the online marketplace of today, there is no way you can tell me that you are cut off from getting any game you would ever want to buy.
- Abomonog, on 11/13/2007, -0/+2Only one company, id Software, has successfully played both dev team and distributer. And even they sold out to EA after a decade. It's just too much of a bitch to do.
- MattBD, on 11/13/2007, -0/+1The same kind of issues do arise here in the UK. There was a case a few years ago where a teenage boy obsessed with the original Manhunt killed someone in a manner reminiscent of the game. The victim's mother was in the papers demanding that it be banned. However, it was rated 18, so the killer (who was 16 or 17) shouldn't have been able to get a copy. Nonetheless, several retailers took it off their shelves.
In my experience, the system is usually fine as it is, it's just that the rules often aren't enforced.
For that matter, I'm not convinced violent games lead to violent behaviour. After all, Charles Manson was inspired by the Beatles Helter Skelter- hardly the most provocative of songs. - dreesemonkey, on 11/13/2007, -0/+1"Dude, there are so many ways I've considered ripping into your horrendous argument (but thanks for attempting to provide one unlike MOST)......Sorry dude; you bringing these things up is simply a dishonest attempt to categorize the issue falsely and it only serves to further dilute the real issue that’s at the core of this manhunt 2 controversy *****."
Way to have more "Dudes" in your comment then actual arguments. You vomit on about the "real issue that's at the the core...." blah blah blah, and then fail to make an actual point yourself. You suck, DUDE. - inactive, on 11/13/2007, -0/+1Yes, there's a rating on the box but it isn't illegal to sell the game to a child of any age. It's completely legal for Gamestop to sell a copy of Manhunt 2 to an eight year old.
- BearinG, on 11/13/2007, -0/+1Yeah I guess if it was that easy, it would be happening already..
- RevEng, on 11/13/2007, -0/+1Quite the opposite, I think they'd be scarred for NOT having seen nudity. Can you imagine a 13 year old going, "Ummm, how come she has a big chest. And where is her pee-pee?"
- inactive, on 11/13/2007, -0/+1No offense norman, but in which case, those who can't afford to move ought to re-evaluate whether or not they should actually buy Manhunt2 or a PS3 or whatever else you may be spending hard earned money on.
- RevEng, on 11/13/2007, -0/+1I don't understand this at all. This is just like the "naked Sims" patch. Can a game maker be responsible for people hacking their game? Even if the content is included in the game, it was disabled, meaning that they didn't intend for people to see it. That's like saying a construction crew is responsible for somebody falling into a construction pit after the person walked past the warning signs, jumped the barriers, and scaled a fence. If you go looking for trouble, don't complain when you find it, and certainly don't blame somebody else for letting you get it.
- Detritus, on 11/13/2007, -0/+1You're being dugg down because you are woefully ill informed on the subject.
- RevEng, on 11/13/2007, -0/+1Unfortunately, I doubt most violent/sexual video games are bought by kids. From my experience, parents will happily buy R rated movies and M rated video games for their 13 year old kid. By the time a youth is actually able to buy a game themselves, they're likely mature enough to handle the content in it.
- decadre, on 11/13/2007, -0/+1I know for the PSP version of Manhunt 2, not only do you have to hack the game itself, BUT also the PSP gaming unit/console. That is why the ESRB declined to do a ratings change like it did for the last Grand Theft Auto game by Rockstar. Now, hacking a game is theoretically one thing, especially on a PC. But on a console? And then hacking the console itself? That requires intimate electronics knowledge, skills, and equipment.
Additionally, I don't even know if the other versions of the game can be hacked, and if it's any easier. Do you need to hack those consoles too? Would you even want too, considering microsoft bans XBox360s from XBox Live that it can detect over the network as being hacked or modified. - spartan2, on 11/14/2007, -0/+1This would be fine of Target or any other major retailer if the ban of sale applied to all media of similar content to Manhunt 2. The only real problem with major retailers banning sale of certain items and not others is that it leads to an almost de facto arrangement to deny any sale of those items in that area. If you can't easily go somewhere else or find it on the internet, you're pretty much screwed (not to mention some items are worth trying and/or warrant in person inspection before purchase).
- decadre, on 11/13/2007, -0/+1Norman, to view the hacked version of the game, and by Rockstar's and ESRB's own statements, it actually isn't the original AO rated game, you just got the gore from the AO version, you have to:
- hack the game
- hack the gaming console to remove all security protections. - Abomonog, on 11/13/2007, -0/+1Except for the fact that ALL games sold in the US are age rated and the presence of the Gothic series (complete with the naked bathers in the first game and being from Germany) proves your line about Europe not selling them is *****.
- Hetman, on 11/13/2007, -1/+2Im not good with coding. But if it is possible someone should get hack a Dora the explorer game and make it so violent and full of sexual content that Target and Wallmart would be forced to take it off their shelves.
- Abomonog, on 11/13/2007, -0/+1Target does have the right to not sell Manhunt 2. It is indeed hypocritical, but they still have that right.
However, they are fools in refusing to sell it. Their refusal to sell has just guaranteed the game will sell by the million and they won't make a dime from it........But I don't think that is the case.
It could easily be said that Target and Rockstar are in collusion here.
If I had a controversial game I wanted to be sure would sell big, one of the first things I would do would be to offer a large retailer a percentage to publically refuse to sell my game. Retailer makes a big stink over game content and refuses to sell. The news gets out and POOF! Instant million seller. The retailer wins because even a small percentage over ALL sales would be substantially larger than a large percentage over the 1 or 2% of the total units that Target would have actually sold (if the percentage is even that high that Target would have sold).
That's my take on the situation. - BearinG, on 11/13/2007, -0/+1Its a double standard.. that's all.
- KSUdesigner, on 11/13/2007, -0/+1Last I checked marijuana is illegal.
- MaTT2011, on 11/13/2007, -0/+1Whoops, wrong one.
-
Show 51 - 94 of 94 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is