Chubear said:
Alacrist said:
 The NY Times got to get their hands on Manhunt 2 recently and they walked away wondering what the whole AO fuss was all about, as they say most R-rated flicks have got way more gore. Writer Seth Schiesel says that "banning the original version of Manhunt 2 may be a good way to demonstrate that the industry can police itself. Side by side, though, movies seem to be way ahead of games in delivering top-notch gore."How does Schiesel come to this conclusion?
He rents a copy of Saw II for comparison's sake. He says the first scene (we never watched it) has "a young man in a bleak cell being taunted to find a key by digging into his own oozing eye socket. If he does not yank out the key in 60 seconds, his head will be crushed in a spiked metal 'death mask' around his neck." Schiesel says the game probably got the rating because the ESRB only saw footage from the game and didn't actually play it (GASP!), and believes that it won't be hard for Rockstar to edit the game down to a Mature rating in time for the holiday season. I wish they would just let this game come out. |
Dude, the NY TIMES hardly knows anything about the gaming industry period. If you've been following the industry for at least 10 years you'd know this. |
I never said they knew anything about the gaming industry. My point was that they were saying the game is alot less violent than alot of rated R movies, meaning why would a game with less gore than a moive be given a AO rating when you can go to Wal-mart and buy a moive that shows you more blood and gore and looks a hellava lot more realistic than any game on the Wii would. And I have been playing games since I was 7 or 8 I can't remember so that gives me about 13 or 14 years in gaming a little more than your 10 year number. Besides, what newspaper period really knows about gaming?
