Tech Bytes

Haloween, eh?

Sounds a little suspicious.

Perhaps this was all for controversy, and thus, free publicity.

I know I replayed the original in anticipation.

I still say "Duckhunt 2: Rise of Duck-18" would be a much better choice. *laughs*

Frankly I'm completely stunned there's even a sequel to Manhunt. It really is a stunningly violent game! I mean... is the sequel going to be more of the same or have the game creators thought up new and 'interesting' ways to kill people? You have to realize just how much research of gristly murders must have gone into making this game...

...that alone gives me the hibblie-jibblies.

Yeah this is probably going to be more of the same. It be nice if there's an actual premise behind the game this time around and not just 'kill this guy with a shard of glass...decapitate this dude...bludgeon this guy with a pipe till his brains...' you get the idea. The game had a very weak backstory, which is probably what made the game seem more violent than it actually was. I mean, sure it was violent, but you can find alot more violence and gore at a movie theatre.

Whether it's "Duckhunt 2" or "Manhunt 2" they would both involve killing and they're also both just videogames.

Cheers to videogames! thank you for being such a fun way to pass the time when theres nothing else to do.

i dont think that comparing the game to Hostel is a good idea, come on, torture as entertainment? how could it not get a "adult only" rating. jeez.

I thought Manhunt had a really good story. It was a pleasant change from the save the world crap that 99% of the other games make you do.

Alex, the DuckHunt2 comment is actually based on a thread ages back wherein myself, Carolyn, Monkey, and to some extent Claudio and Garet, were poking fun at the idea of Mach Speed ducks from Duckhunt. Wii peripherals hands on, or somethign to that extent. You should read our banter; it's really quite funny.

But yes, the Duckhunt comment Carolyn made wasn't a slam or anything; it's just her sense of humour. (I hope.)

The thing this article doesn't know is that the average age of gamers is said to be late 20's early 30's. Maybe 20 years ago, it was directed for kids, but not anymore.

That's like saying cartoons should be judged more harshly for content because they are "for children".

Cartoons and such used to be cool... the original Batman TAS was friggin' violent, but managed to evade the censor's scythe by using specific techniques, such as showing a split second of a white flash just as a fist "connected" to avoid showing a punch on tv. This avoids the "showing a punch on tv" rule. They also used lazers in guns to avoid the "showing a bullet firing weapon" rule.

These days there are tons of techniques that COULD be used to censor violence... but... if it's a cartoon aimed at 16-21 year old, chances are they've seen much worse in a paper or on the CBC! XD

Charlie Bear and Carolyn,
I understand that it wasn't a slam and my blurb wasn't in retaliation to you Carolyn. I was just trying to point out that no matter what game you play there is mostly always killing or violence to an extent (I feel personally sorry for the thousands of Koopa Turtles that I've jumped on then kicked across the screen in Mario 1). I also find that a lot of people react a little to harshly towards this violence when maybe they should relax just a little more... that’s it, I know!! Someone should make a videogame where you have to complain about videogame violence, that way they won't go out and do it in real life.

But Meaghan, if you were REALLY torturing someone or something for entertainment, of course that would be deplorable. But nothing is being tortured. Granted, though the game is completely unrealistic, I wouldn't want an 8-year old playing the game. But I see no reason why a 15-year old couldn't play this game and not be scarred for life like some people seem to suggest will happen. By that age, if a person hasn't figured out fantasy from reality, then that kid has some pretty big problems that goes well beyond video games.

For the record Meaghan, I played DuckHunt when I was 13 years old. Killed virtual ducks by the hundreds (shot the dog too). 20 years later I have yet to kill my first real duck. These are just video games.

Either if it's a video game or a movie...it's up to parents to parent kids. M rated games are not meant to be played by people under 18 (like R rated movies).

I'm glad to see this game come out, cause as an adult I have that right to play it, and I want too. People use this as an excuse when they don't know how to parent there kids.

Games should be more harshly judged. As there effect on the user / viewer is far greater than that of movies. The interactive aspect of gaming reinforces cause and effect patterns, and I believe for a game like this, has a detrimental effect on the brain. I don't believe that whether a game is rated Mature vs Adult Only makes a difference. I think there should be time restrictions on how long a session can last, and how many hours a day a game can be played.

You've never played a game in your life, have you Blaine? (Rhetorical)

How would limiting playtime affect anything?

The fact that the rating is "mature" should be a hint that it's intended for audiences that are mature enough to handle the game.

I, for one, loved seeing all the brutal executions in Manhunt 1. It made me laugh to see the polygonal figures brains fly out everywhere from the "red" baseball bat attack. It's a game. It's supposed to be fun. It's not some thing that will train you to be ruthless, or anything. Play time won't affect anything.

Although my enjoyment of the game is almost with a childish immaturity, there is one distinction. I know it's a game. I know that nothing is reproducable or acceptable in any means.

While I agree that games should be judged more harshly as it is from an interactive perspective, someone who is of a "mature" age should be able to choose whether or not to play the game. Also, this is clearly not targeted to children and as far as I know no child would be able to buy it without a "mature" person acting on their behalf. Concerning the restriction on session time and hours per day, that's a slippery slope. Putting restrictions like that is very big brother, and if we put restrictions on that then why not on unhealthy food consumption, or other choices that we make which aren't exactly healthy.

*sigh*...

Video gaming shouldn't be blamed for the evils in our society. I don't deny that some people may be affected by the content in video games to a greater degree than others, to the point where it affects behaviour but they are the exception not the norm. And of course, as with anything, gaming should be enjoyed in moderation.

Many of us on this thread have played video games for the better part of our lives, and we are not twisted or deranged. I know Carolyn, for example, has been playing for about as long as I have and she has a wonderful sense of humour. She may have a penchant for killing virtual ducks but thats no big deal. She works, pays her bills and contributes to society. She's perfectly normal. Same goes for Charlie Bear. Family guy, also has a great sense of humour. (Still mooching your niece's Wii? :p) And I'm not sure how old Garet is but he's also a level-headed dude, not some homicidal maniac (...you're not, right? kidding ^^).

Society is always looking for a scapegoat. An easy way out. Video games aren't meant to teach you right from wrong. Video games are a fun diversion, but gamers know we live in the real world.

Individuals that have a problem with the level of violence in the particular form of media that they are exposed to always have the option of not participating in that form of entertainment. The fact that some might view a violent video game as being dangerous to society or to impressionable adolescents is their opinion; however, they should not be given the authority to dictate the type of media that society as a whole can participate in. Some regulation should allowed in the interests of protecting the personal rights of individuals. The media should conforms to the accepted interpretation of the law in relation to the prevention of the transmission of media that could be seen as inciting hate, or media involving the abuse of individuals (not to be confused with the simulated violence found in most if not all forms of media that we enjoy). If individuals are concerned over the affect that simulated violence would have on children they should note that the video game industry submits is products for review and label them with an ESRB rating that suggests the age appropriateness of each video game. The next step would be to monitor and fine stores that allow the sale of Mature or Adult Only games to individuals that are not of age. Ownership should also be placed on parents as they should be aware of what they children are doing rather then blaming the media. I mean people are not blaming the manufacturers of guns and ammunition for the increase in gun violence even though they are facilitating violent offenders by supplying them with the means to commit their crimes so why should a video game that has less of a direct impact in facilitating an individual's criminal activity be branded as it has? Why should a form of entertainment be so branded why the social conditions that breed criminal behaviors are ignored?

I've never even met Claudio and I already wish we could go out shooting virtual ducks together.... *siiiigh*

Also, who has a bigger influence on you? The President or a video game? The news or a video game? Parents and peers or a video game> Truth be told, video games have begun to replicate human life to a t, but that by no means means (I hate having to do that!) that kids will do what the games show.

For one, I was one of those kids who played Power Rangers with my friends when I was little. We never hit each other because we'd been taught hitting was wrong. We pretended. :D

I've seen horror movies that are more violent and grotesque than the Manhunt video game. Yet they don't get hit with an adults-only rating if they don't tone down their violence. Why should video games be different? A 'Mature' rating prohibits kids from having this game anyways, so this is really censoring what grown adults are allowed to view.

I think there's 3 trains of thought that lead to the harsher censorship that video games suffer from.

I think that in a majority of people's views, video games are still a childrens toy, so it's easier to censor them.

Secondly, video games are interactive, which could lead to some problems. In Manhunt, I choose to stab a guys eyes out with a shard of glass. I decide how to do it, and I carry it out with the control. A movie is linear, and definite.

Plus, video games and violence are becoming more of an issue. There's idiots like Jack Thompson who are going out and trying to find a connection to video games and pretty much every tragedy imaginable. So, since the ESRB is a part of the industry, as opposed to an outside source, it would be in it's best interests to make as little controversy as possible.

Heehee, thanks Carolyn ^^ very sweet of you to say, and even if you were only teasing me you got me to smile stupidly for a good while. Psst, btw I never say never ;)

Ahem...Anyways...
Garet, you make some very good points. Kids do make up a large part of the user base, but then again so do adults. I think many of the problems concerning the content in video games would be remedied if the ESRB's rating system was taken a little more seriously. Kids games for kids and games with more mature themes for adults. Isn't that what the rating system was designed for in the first place? So we wouldn't have to worry about a kid playing a game he/she shouldn't be playing? Sure SOUNDS simple enough.

I'm hearing some lovey doveyness going around.. tsk tsk children!

Kudos to Carolyn for bringing back the DuckHunt2: Rise of Duck-18, Muahahaha!

Honestly, back when i was a wee child.. which was not 5 years ago, I had fun murdering people as viciously as possible, wait for the reticle to turn blood red and drop the guy in front of you with a Zip-Lock bag, tee hee, don't get me started on the Glad Garbage bags, damn those things are strong.. Anyhoo murdering people hasn't affected me at all in the past years as I have been killing things since. It's not the game that causes kids to go crazy, it's the environment that the child is brought up in, thats all.

Either way I'll have to wait and see what the trailers look like in this game.

BTW I didn't know mass murder had anything to do with having a storyline, lol :D

And Claudio, to be honest, most of my bullets went into the dog...I'd like to see him doing something other than laugh at me *tears up*

In the arcade of Duck Hunt, you could shoot the dog.

Also in a NES game called Bill somethings Trick Shooting. The dog made a cameo there to get shot.

You couldn't shoot the dog in the nes game because there simply wasn't enough space on the game to do it.

Garet, it didn't stop me from trying, hahahahah!

And it should've been called Chuck Norris' Trick Shooting, lol

Nah Monkey, we were just fooling around. No wait!! That didn't come out right! We were just playing around, that's all. Btw, welcome back ^^ what barrel have you been hidin' in? ;)

Well guys I have my own theories about 'dog-shooting' in Duck Hunt. I think there was more than enough space in the game to make an identical version to the arcade. Nintendo has always played on the safe side when it comes to the content of their games. I think they wanted to avoid the possibility of parents objecting to little Johnny or Sally sitting in the living room with gun in hand, blasting the smithereens out of a dog.

As for a storyline (or lack thereof) in Manhunt, it would have been nice I suppose. I bought the game out of sheer morbid curiosity and had there been some kind of plot to the game, maybe I might not have noticed that I was performing the same execution over and over...and over again. It was fun the first dozen times or so. I'll probably pass on Manhunt 2. Probably ^^.

Fortunately Claudio, I've been hiding in a barrel of fermenting Whiskey... Cant remember how i got in or out though.

But seriously though, I lost my computers at home to a power surge, even though i had power bars on everything, but i built a makeshift computer out of spare parts, thus giving me access to the net once again, unfortunately no access to the gaming community as it is very slow.

But I agree with you, I bought Manhunt 1 from sheer curiosity, but I think I'll hold back on buying the second one, unless it comes out on PC and looks somewhat good.

And thanks for the welcome Claudio :D

Nah. There wasn't enough room on the cartridge, considering you couldn't get duckhunt by itself. You could only get it with Mario, or Mario and World Class Track Meet. So, they couldn't offer a different game from the packed World Class Track Meet cartridge on a single cartridge. Plus the arcade was a Nintendo property anyways.

As for the Manhunt story, I thought it was pretty good. It was refreshing, to say the least. It wasn't the same old save the world, or defeat a great evil. It was just save your self.

Alright, so I checked out some gameplay vids and the trailer for Manhunt2, everything looks the same, saw a guy's vertebrae get ripped out with a hammer which leads me to beleive that it's the same old madness/rampage/IseeyouIkillyou kind of game, aka the same as the original.

On top of that the weapon selection menu looks a little messed up, it pops up right in front of your view, which i find very inconvenient when it comes to "quickly" switching weapons to see which one is worse than the next..

Again, I think I may just have to hold onto my wallet this time around.

As for World Class Track Meet, I still can't beat Rabbit...even when using my hands...

I just learned that the original version had been leaked in Europe, and may be available on the net (I don't know), for modded PS2s no doubt. Apparently, the changes are very noticable. Infact, executions now are very hard to make out what's going on. Seems like they pulled a "Punisher" with this one, if you looked into that game before.

Once, again, do we need ratings, when we can simply ban them from the market? Holy capote! Seriously, you goodie two shoe parents out there really need to think what you’re doing when you attempt to keep your kids desensitized from violence. As much as it would be nice to never show a single kid a violent picture/ scene, it’s very much part of our society and in our culture. You let a kid grow up not knowing the differences, it will affect them when they grow up, and they’ll lack that ‘moral’ difference between Reality and fantasy. I agree with most, age 15 is a good age to allow a kid to play certain games, and by some I mean every kid isn’t the same; some might find certain stuff too intense or scary. If by that age they can’t decipher reality and fantasy, then yeah, they do need help, because their issues could be devastating A. to themselves B. to the people around them. So if we keep our children desensitized from today’s violence, and isolate them from society and modern days culture, what happens to them when the arrive into their lives with all this ‘violence’ around them? Are they going to go crawl back onto mommy and daddy’s lap? Are they going to isolate themselves from society for a good 30 years, then suddenly appear when they can pick up their old age pension? Once again everyone needs an understanding of reality and fantasy and how the two differ from each other, and this is made solely by those people who couldn’t decipher reality from fantasy, and tried to reproduce it for themselves, they don’t know how to handle reality so they chose to live in their ‘fantasy world’. So you’re wondering; ‘Well if video games and the media caused these kids to rebel, kill, steal, and hijack, then what makes this generation any different? And how can we stop them?’

(continued) Well to be honest, the whole sentence is negative thinking and out looking. You only get what you expect. But anyways, there is a lot you can do. Talk with your kids. Explain to them the reason why certain things happen, but don’t overdue in the video gaming. Like someone else in the forums said, giving timelines and time limits won’t play anymore of a role then if they were to eat broccoli instead of asparagus. Let them know that the FPS alien game is fake, let them know that space ship navigation and space inhabitation isn’t plausible yet. Let them know if they ever have any questions about the game they’re playing. Even though most of you aren’t even gamers, the Internet can become an‘ instant classic’ in providing you the parent/guardian with the proper information. Don’t scold them about it; be passive. Yelling gets nowhere, same with being abusive. Ditto. You want your kid to understand the differences, not experience them. Set ‘boundaries’ not rules. Boundaries help limit your kid to picking out the more gruesome games until they feel ready to move on. Also replacing boundaries with rules also makes the ‘authority’ less lawful, but still maintaining it’s lawful-ness. Remember; your kids USUALLY reflect on how you raised him/her, and 7.7 out of 10 times it is the parents fault. A lot of the child’s life is reflected from their teachings from A. The parent B. The guardians C. The family. Make sure that you the parent/ guardian can be there to explain certain situations about the game and keep reality and fantasy separated from each other, as they are commonly being misused and read in today’s society.