In the wake of Rockstar’s withering attack on the BBFC, the board has accepted Geoffrey Robertson’s assertion that there is no link between violence in video games and behavioural harm. However, despite Rockstar’s attempt to put the focus of the ban on this publicly held yet unproven belief, the BBFC seems intent on tiptoeing around the issue. Instead it is emphasising the differences between games and film as justification for the fact that something like Manhunt 2 can be refused classification, while an equally horrific film like Hostel 2 can get past.

"Film is a different medium; it is simply is a different experience,” the BBFC’s Andrew Caldecott told the appeal hearing, admitting “There are ways in which it is perhaps more involving, because you are dealing with absolute reality, with real people, in film.” However, he went on to explain “On the other hand, many people watch horror films to some extent from the point of view of the victim, or the point of view of what's going to happen - not with this very distinctive point of view of being the person who's wielding the weapon, and is rewarded for killing in the bloodiest way possible.”

I think that’s a fair point and one that should be considered by the board when granting / deciding classification. The only real way around it is to prove that there is absolutely no chance of a causal relationship between game violence and real life violence. Which, of course, will never happen. And if it did, it would probably render the BBFC’s role utterly pointless.

As to the question of why Manhunt 2 – a game designed and intended only for adults – should be singled out for refusal of classification, Caldecott’s argument took more of a worrying direction. "In a Utopian society, you would have effective measures where the over-18s could play what was suitable for them without being cluttered by the fact minors will see them. But you can't make classification decisions without regard to the social prevalence [of games]," he said.

I can accept that a lot of people are still hanging on to the frankly misguided belief that ‘Games are for kids, ergo any age rating must be bullshit, because games are for kids, right?’ However, I’m not particularly thrilled by the idea that the BBFC could use this as justification for banning a product clearly intended for adults. If that’s the case, then why not ban all 18 rated games for fear of them falling into the hands of kids? And then 15s and the 12s and right on down until only U rated games are allowed through.

And also, why does this affect games more than films, you might ask. Again, Caldecott makes a worry revelation; “You don't come home from work, have your tea and watch Saw 3. Games are played at all times of the day when children are about in the house,” he said.

So, again, it’s not really down to the idea that Manhunt 2 is in any way worse than a violent movie or contains content more abhorrent than a violent movie, but that it may be consumed at a time more likely to be seen BY KIDS. Who aren’t supposed to be playing the game. Of course, kids have absolutely no idea how to work DVD players or sniff out their parents high rated movie collections.

Fortunately, one part of the counter-argument does actually make some sense. “If you're not careful, you get into a peculiar game of Grandmother's Footsteps, where everybody's shuffling forward but Grandma's never allowed to turn round and say, 'Stop'… Is there never a point at which you can say, 'This is unacceptable'?” Cladecott observed. Which is a fair point; after all, the BBFC is supposed to be there to turn around and say “stop” if a game or movie or advert or whatever has just gone too far.

Even if it can’t be proved that viewing this material can lead to dire consequences, it can at least serve to protect the industry from itself, from blatantly rubbing its gore-fests in the faces of those who do believe there could be a negative impact from exposure to interactive violent content.

Backing this up with regards to Manhunt 2, the BBFC man explained, “In this particular game, the victims are people. They are not aliens or griffins or Daleks… You see lots of human beings quite mercilessly kicking and punching other human beings as you move through the game.”

Some good points and some bad points have been made by both parties and the hearing has been concluded pending the Video Appeals Committee’s decision. No fixed date has been set for a final decision. Anyone care to take a bet on the outcome?

Source
GamesIndustry.biz

Related posts
ESRB gives Manhunt 2 the all clear
Brollies out, Take Two – Manhunt 2 censored content hack outcry building to a storm

Came straight to this page? Visit www.pspsps.tv for all the latest news.