Manhunt 2 and the Minds of 17 Year Olds
Manhunt 2 was in the news again last week. Rockstar resubmitted the game to the ESRB and was successful in getting the game’s rating changed from AO (Adults Only) to M (Recommended for ages 17 and older). There was of course some controversy over this new ruling, particularly since the ESRB does not make its findings public. The press and the anti-videogame forces demanded to know just what was changed to make the game deserving of a gentler rating. I’m curious too, but for a different reason. I think what everyone has missed here is that the real difference between an AO and an M rating is whether or not the content is suitable for 17 year olds. What exactly was removed from the game that would have warped the minds of 17 year olds everywhere? Is the entire purpose of the AO rating simply to protect 17 year olds? I sincerely doubt it. The AO rating exists merely as a PR tool of the ESRB so that they can point to it and say that they are sincere about protecting youth from disturbing videogames. It is almost never actually used and the fact that it was applied to Manhunt 2 was probably more of a PR stunt by the ESRB that backfired than a genuine attempt to protect 17 year old innocents. The Grand Theft Auto Hot Coffee incident was a serious black eye for the ESRB and they thought that they could use the AO rating of Manhunt 2 to kill two birds with one stone. First, it was a bit of payback to Rockstar for embarrassing them in the first place. Second, it was an attempt to show the public that they are not asleep at the wheel and that they have a vigilant eye trained on the industry and on Rockstar in particular. Too bad all they succeeded in doing was punching themselves in the face and blackening their other eye.
