Should Man Hunt be banned?

Post by **Loredoctor** » Wed Feb 25, 2004 12:56 am

Rockstar have released their latest game. In Manhunt, you play a convicted murderer who is taken from prison and forced to be in snuff films. I honestly think the game is sick and should be banned.

Post by **Worm of Despite** » Wed Feb 25, 2004 1:56 am

This game is meant for adults who can acknowledge the shock value of the game and separate that from reality, thus making it entertaining (so long as they can stomach it). No way would I allow anyone under 18 in the same room as this game.

Oh, and it's been out for a while. And it's already been banned in New Zealand.

Personally, I'm not so wild about banning any video game. If you do, you're only letting the censors put their foot in the door, and by doing that you're endangering creative freedom.

In the end, it's just a product. If ya don't like it don't but it. If someone can give me hard proof that it's more than a game, then I challenge you to do so. Otherwise, it's totally harmless.

Post by **Loredoctor** » Wed Feb 25, 2004 9:12 am

Well, snuff is seen as entertainment and creative by some people yet it is universally acknowledged as wrong. I know snuff and video games are different, but where do we draw the line? For instance, if a game came out with a rapist as the main character, or a child-killer, would we be so quick to defend it as being creative?
Further, just because adults play it is nothing. Adults are not so mature as to separate games from reality. If Man Hunt was to inspire one person to commit a crime then the game is wrong.
Not attacking you, Lord Foul, just exploring the issue

Post by **Baradakas** » Wed Feb 25, 2004 9:35 am

Well, sure it SHOULD be, but it won't be. At least not in the U.S.

Post by **Revan** » Wed Feb 25, 2004 10:16 am

Can you get me a link to get more info on the game Ur-Vile? I don't knw anything about it.

Post by **Loredoctor** » Wed Feb 25, 2004 10:36 am

www.rockstargames.com/manhunt/

There you go my (naughty) friend.

Post by **Revan** » Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:19 am

Ah, it's just a game. Not real. It don't matter that much.

Post by **Worm of Despite** » Wed Feb 25, 2004 3:35 pm

I know you weren't attacking me Ur-Vile. My head woulda hurt if ya did. Ya know, a bruise or something on the noggin. heh . . .

On a brighter note (I think), this is the first case where Darth and I agree on something. Cue Twilight Zone sound.

Okay, exploring time!

I wonder, how much blame can be laid on the game if it inspires an act of violence? How is it solving anything if a video game is a scapegoat for someone's wrongdoing? Why'd we try to lay some of the blame for Columbine on a game like DOOM, made in 1993? To make us feel better about the shootings and try to understand, perhaps? Lastly, ask yourself this: was this product, Manhunt, geared to entertain, or is its true purpose something more malevolent, eh? I think I know the answer.

I could see the wrong in a video game if it made the choice of killing someone in the real world, but, no, in a murder it is always the person who wields the knife and strikes the blows, not the video game. I find a very big line between the influence and the choice of acting on it. Very big. Plus, there is no clear line of communication between the video game and the individual playing it. As long as the game isn't going "Do it, Johnny . . . kill people, kill them now", then I believe the person who commits the violence must've done some very big conclusion jumping about the game's message (if there is any intended message, which there is not in the case of Manhunt).

Anyway, I have not read of nor heard of Manhunt inspiring acts of violence. And since such instances have not occurred, I'll say it's been proven safe up to this point. Plus, the graphics in the game aren't that great. And the violence is highly stylized. Because of those two facts alone, I wouldn't give it too many brownie points for realism.

And, heh, I don't know what adults you're talking about, Ur-Vile, that can't separate a video game from reality. Maybe my uncle? He's kind of crazy . . .

Post by **Revan** » Fri Feb 27, 2004 3:52 pm

Excellent post Foul

Your right. It's a game, and not going to effect anyone, apart from the weak willed. Therefore I am not at risk.

Post by **Brinn** » Fri Feb 27, 2004 5:06 pm

I agree wholeheartedly Foul...Although I haven't played the game it appears to be inappropriate for younger children and I would hope that parents would exercise appropriate judgement when deciding whether to allow them to purchase or play this game in their home. With that said, the issue is just another symptom of societies desire to distance the individual from taking responsibility for their own actions and shifting the blame to external forces or circumstance. What ever happened to accountability for our own actions and why must all bad behavior be attributed to something besides the individual? Can we not acknowledge that some people are just wicked and will do wicked things regardless of outside impetus?

Post by **Loredoctor** » Fri Feb 27, 2004 11:06 pm

I never said that violent games are responsible for violent actions of some people. My point is that Manhunt is a sick game. This is the sort if thing that is slowly breaking down the barriers of good taste; it would have been unheard of 10 years ago, yet today it is ok. When will it stop?

Post by **Worm of Despite** » Sat Feb 28, 2004 12:40 am

It's not my cup of tea either, but I think it's merely a bunch of pixels and polygons and bip-mapping. Some Shakespeare plays were violent. Most great films are. Look at Clockwork Orange. It came out in 1971, and it depicts two scenes of rape and lots of ultra-violence. There has always been stuff like this out on the market. Plus, they're not trying to shove it down our throats, are they? Cultures change. Tolerance levels change. 2000 years ago Romans thought the stuff their kids were into was crazy.

We have the choice to go out and buy or rent it. If your opinion is that it's sick, then all right. I fully respect that. But others feel different about the game: they like it or enjoy it or love it. It wouldn't be fair to take it away from those people--just because some feel it's sick. Those that feel it's sick should just ignore it.

Also, saying games like this will eventually break the barriers of good taste reminds me of the Cold War statement about Communism causing a "domino effect". It's an interesting theory, and it's easily believed, but in the end it'll be proven wrong. There will always be good artists and good tastes out there, as long as there are human beings.

It may look like things are getting worse, but history proves again and again that every culture had what it considered disgusting. Every generation went through this exact phase. Looking back, a hundred years from now, we'll laugh at our current pretensions.

Post by **Loredoctor** » Sat Feb 28, 2004 12:46 am

You make some very good points, LF. However, do you not think 'condoning' murder (as in the mc being a convicted killer) is pushing it too far? I agree with how things have changed; but to my knowledge a game like Manhunt is new.

Post by **Worm of Despite** » Sat Feb 28, 2004 12:53 am

Well it was going to happen sooner or later. Boundaries have always been pushed. I expect debates in the near future about violence in video games when their graphics become photo-realistic.

Also, I've never heard of a game that condones murder. Are you saying the game's publishers and its development team believes murder isn't wrong? From what I've played of the game and gathered, the fact that he is a convicted murderer is merely part of his background. I feel if one gathers the game condones murder because of that, then they are jumping to some pretty big conclusions. The actual game consists of him being hunted for "sport", and he must use whatever tactics available for survival. I'd do it too, heh.

Post by **Loredoctor** » Sat Feb 28, 2004 1:02 am

Sorry for being confusing. I used 'condoned' to reflect that in a way the game does.

I realise at no point it actually states murder isn't bad but to not comment on the main character's past is almost condoning it. You know, perhaps revealing guilt or being shunned - that sort of thing.

Post by **Worm of Despite** » Sat Feb 28, 2004 1:15 am

I see where you’re coming from, but if it doesn’t specifically or clearly state an endorsement of murdering real, non-fictional human beings, then it still seems like secondhand guessing. Especially if there's not even a single statement endorsing real murder at all. Subliminal, maybe? I don’t know, seems totally subjective to each person. Again, I don't think the makers of the game had a message in mind when making it. The idea of a man being hunted by other men in a dystopic, crime-ridden future-world seems pretty fanciful to me anyway.

And if they neglected to tell more of his background or give him an inner monologue or conscience, I’ll dismiss that on grounds that it was a fictional video game character and not important. It's not exactly a role-playing game, either. In fact not at all. It's a third-person thriller. The game is about the actual gameplay, not story.

Post by **Loredoctor** » Sat Feb 28, 2004 1:22 am

Brings to mind, Running Man.

Post by **Revan** » Mon Mar 01, 2004 12:20 pm

You know Ur-Vile... with all this complaining... your starting to sound like Zeph...

Post by **Eugen Razvan** » Thu Mar 04, 2004 2:47 am

Leave Zeph alone.

Post by **Revan** » Mon Mar 15, 2004 10:46 am

I like Zeph! Except when he's talking about his dreams *Shudders*

Kevin's Watch

Kevin's Watch

Should Man Hunt be banned?

Should Man Hunt be banned?