Rockstar: Open up an online store and release an Unrated (AO) Special Edition version.
I'd pay $100+ for it.
Do it.
Me too, as long as it comes with this.
Rockstar: Open up an online store and release an Unrated (AO) Special Edition version.
I'd pay $100+ for it.
Do it.
RevenantKioku said:It's not BS. Because it is their product. Don't like, don't buy. You people won't, though. You won't even complain directly to the companies. You'll just continue playing armchair analysis on GAF.
RevenantKioku said:It's not BS. Because it is their product. Don't like, don't buy. You people won't, though. You won't even complain directly to the companies. You'll just continue playing armchair analysis on GAF.
AgentOtaku said:probably old as shit but anyone noticed that Amazon has now changed the ship date from July to Sept?!
.....it was still July when I preordered it yesterday!
titiklabingapat said:This is getting lame. Nintendo, allow the uncensored version, you ****ers! This is your chance!!
titiklabingapat said:This is getting lame. Nintendo, allow the uncensored version, you ****ers! This is your chance!!
Kafel said:'
You guys are sick.
I think I can understand that sometimes we should go against the censorship but there R* simply went too far.
soundwave05 said:Yeah, finally their chance to get back into no.1 in the console race past Sony! Errr ... wait. :lol
Lets face it, AO or M-rated, the Wii version will likely be the most controversial by a country mile anyway. I mean how was that "decapitation rape" even supposed to work ... you thrust your Wiimote back and forth as your character ... uh, well you get the idea. Pretty ****ing disturbing.
PS3 and Wii are their products, yes? Therefore they have say about things, yes? This isn't very hard. It isn't silly or "BS" like you naively want to believe.Quazar said:Oh it's Sony's and Nintendos product. K.
I see no problem here. If Rockstar really has a vision of this, they will get it out somehow and somewhere. If not, they will cave to money, as many before them.EDIT: The companies dont care what you have to say. They decide for you. Thats exactly the problem!
Ehh, it's not even a midterm year. Of all the possible times to release a game, this is farther than average away from major elections.soundwave05 said:The backlash/media attention for this game will probably be monsterous. Again, releasing this during election season of all times? Wow.
It's not a matter of defending anything. It's more that we accept the fact that Sony and Nintendo won't allow the game to be released on their respective platforms with an AO rating so changes are required. This is a business and in the end, it's not worth getting all pissy over. That is unless you want Rockstar to eat the millions of dollars they've invested in the development just to prove a point to make you happy. Bottomline Manhunt cannot exist with any rating higher than M so maybe some people should grasp that concept and get over it. Again, it's not worth getting all pissed off over.Quazar said:Yea I'm new to gaming.I'm just shocked you people are actually defending this shit. I dont care if it pleases someone who wants the sheeps money my friend. And after reading several previews I dont see how it couldn't get an AO rating. I'm shocked everytime this happens I see people just ride along.I'm not
Krowley said:Even if they allowed it, rockstar would still censor the game because it can't get on enough store shelves with an AO. They spent too much money on this game to let it be restricted from big retailers.
An AO is the equivelant to an NC17 or an X rating in the movies... If you make something like that, it has to be low budget because you're not going to get a big return.. They won't show it enough theaters, so you have to make an unrated straight to video version.. The gaming equivelant is to release a budget PC title.
Krowley said:Assuming that's true (which apparently it still hasn't been sourced) That's the definition of AO content. If they're going to have such a rating, that's the kind of game that should recieve it and it's definitly a bit too sick for my tastes so i would blame rockstar for going over the line, not the ersb or nintendo or sony.
RevenantKioku said:You just want everything conveniently your way.
JoshuaJSlone said:Ehh, it's not even a midterm year. Of all the possible times to release a game, this is farther than average away from major elections.
The right to die in Iraq.ksamedi said:Whats the difference between a 17 year old and an 18 year old again?
RevenantKioku said:PS3 and Wii are their products, yes? Therefore they have say about things, yes? This isn't very hard. It isn't silly or "BS" like you naively want to believe.
I see no problem here. If Rockstar really has a vision of this, they will get it out somehow and somewhere. If not, they will cave to money, as many before them.
You just want everything conveniently your way.
With a 17 year old, it's rape whether or not the headless corpse consents.ksamedi said:Whats the difference between a 17 year old and an 18 year old again?
Mr_Furious said:It's not a matter of defending anything. It's more that we accept the fact that Sony and Nintendo won't allow the game to be released on their respective platforms with an AO rating so changes are required. This is a business and in the end, it's not worth getting all pissy over. That is unless you want Rockstar to eat the millions of dollars they've invested in the development just to prove a point to make you happy. Bottomline Manhunt cannot exist with any rating higher than M so maybe some people should grasp that concept and get over it. Again, it's not worth getting all pissed off over.
Docpan said:I see only one option here. Delay the game, remove all of the questionable content for console version to get it to an M rating, then later on release the "UNCUT VERSION" for PCs.
It's a brilliant idea.
About 365 days.ksamedi said:Whats the difference between a 17 year old and an 18 year old again?
Dizzy said:About 365 days.
Quazar said:The best idea, indeed.
Quazar said:No smart one I want to make my own choice on whether to buy the game based on the content with w/e rating it gets, not have some retarded corporation playing the role of my parents. And it is BS. Keep following the herd. Might as well just let the govt get in on my buying decisions according to your logic. Oh wait..
ksamedi said:Whats the difference between a 17 year old and an 18 year old again?
Mr.City said:The 18 year old can handle extremely explict scenes of violence and sex. The 17 year old can only handle explicit forms of violences and sex. Get it?
JoshuaJSlone said:With a 17 year old, it's rape whether or not the headless corpse consents.
Mature is still a parental caution, the same as a movie being rated-R movies. It's intended for mature audiences, and anyone underage should not be able to purchase the game, but ultimately it would be up to the parents whether they let the child play or not. Adult Only is just like it reads, in that absolutely no one under the age of 18 should ever get there hands on a copy or play the game.ksamedi said:Whats the difference between a 17 year old and an 18 year old again?
Krowley said:This is the equivelant to a theater chain saying that they won't play NC17 movies. Consoles are the gaming equivelant to movie theaters. They are private company's and they have the right to decide what they want to certify. Their right to restrict content on their platform is just as important as our right to watch what we want. Removing either one would be an unfair restriction.
Wow. Just...wow.Quazar said:No smart one I want to make my own choice on whether to buy the game based on the content with w/e rating it gets, not have some retarded corporation playing the role of my parents. And it is BS. Keep following the herd. Might as well just let the govt get in on my buying decisions according to your logic. Oh wait..
JoshuaJSlone said:With a 17 year old, it's rape whether or not the headless corpse consents.
Quazar said:I see what you're saying. But the comparison falls short for several reasons. They aren't the same would be the first one.
ManaByte said:Yea, they aren't the same. Console makers have the right to decide what is released on their system because they make the damn thing. It's their product and their brand to protect.
Remember the saying "There's no such thing as bad publicity"? People who say that are stupid.Quazar said:Protect against what exactly? The already carded person buying the game? The possibility Jack might try and make a case with the game?
Quazar said:Protect against what exactly? The already carded person buying the game? The possibility Jack might try and make a case with the game?
RevenantKioku said:Remember the saying "There's no such thing as bad publicity"? People who say that are stupid.
ManaByte said:The media doing first-segment nightly news stories about how the Wii or PlayStation 2 has a Adults-Only videogame?
Believe it or not, but games are still considered for kids by the majority of the population on this planet.
No, it's not true. There is definitely such thing as "bad publicity". I hate that ****ing saying, cuz people belt it out like it's a truism. You can benefit from negative publicity, yes, but you can also lose by it, and there is some publicity so bad that you cannot win from it.titiklabingapat said:It's true though. It's just a matter of handling the extreme ones to your benefit.
Quazar said:And the majority who are going to buy Manhunt originally are not KIDS in the first place.(With or without AO rating) Downgrading the designers original vision of the game to suit, nothing, doesn't add up to me. Let the media do whatt hey do. In fact I'd agree to the media making the game sell more, just for it.
Firewire said:So Nintendo & Sony have officially dropped the game now, if it receives AO listing.
Which only leaves MS & PC, would MS take this game? I can see Jack Thompson crusading against Rockstar & MS, and does MS need a bad rep with parents (mothers) going into the holiday season?