Ok so first Manhunt 2 got banned on UK on the Wii And PS2 for no reason what so ever.The British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) rejected the game for release after going through its content and deciding it crossed a moral line via its "unremitting bleakness and callousness of tone in an overall game context which constantly encourages visceral killing with exceptionally little alleviation or distancing". In other words, it showed 'immoral behaviour' that, while fitting within the game's story and established tone, was relentless and more than likely beyond what the medium has asked a player to actively participate in before. True to the first Manhunt, then, it would seem. Things got even worse when the American ratings board, the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) slapped an Adult Only tag on Manhunt 2, which meant the game would instantly be limited to certain shops ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å“ dominant family based stores such as Wal-Mart refuse to stock titles with an AO rating, which takes away a massive chunk of potential retail. And just to add further insult to injury, neither Sony nor Nintendo allow AO rated software on their consoles (something Microsoft doesnÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢t allow, either). Not a particularly well thought-out system, seeing as it pretty much renders the AO classification utterly worthless, but that's a subject for another time. The bottom line is that all these fallen dominos effectively makes Manhunt 2 banned in the U.S. as well. If Rockstar is indeed playing the Press with Manhunt 2, it's a dangerous game indeed. Yes, there are now millions who have heard of the title who may not have even known it existed before ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å“ the very epitome of good marketing. And yes, a big red button has been slapped on Manhunt 2, making it irresistible to those curious to see just how bad it could be. But if the game fails to reach stores, it's all for naught. So has Rockstar got a slightly altered version ready to roll out, in preparation? Did it just wind up the Controversy Machine to get maximum benefit, totally aware that it could push its REAL iteration of Manhunt 2 out, coasting on a wave of near unprecedented infamy? Because in truth, even if a tamer edition was released, there would still be more people buying it than before the outcry, regardless of whether they feel ripped off (excuse the pun) by its lack of apparent brutality, after all this shouting. It's a bit too early to talk about the game disappearing altogether, however. Too much money has been thrown into Manhunt 2's development, and to scrap it would be a total waste that very few companies in the games industry can afford to take. Yet, is it truly as horrific as we're led to believe? Reports of it involving necrophilia and microwaving cats should be treated with a large pinch of salt at the moment, but there's no doubt the game is violent and probably powerful with it. It's horrible to think that children (or indeed anyone) can be affected by such things, clichÃƒÆ’Ã‚Â© facetiousness aside. But ultimately, interaction or no, it's content that creates the problems, less so the fact we can interact with it. And if that's the case, where does one form of content become safe while another is allowed to go by without equal measures? If we boil it down to the risk factor where we're asking ourselves "can we afford to take the chance of someone seeing [whatever] if it's a danger to society", then does it truly matter if we're playing, reading, watching or listening? Risk is risk, after all ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å“ and if we can save one person by removing a violent game, then surely we can also save more by stopping all violent films, music and books as well? Just where do you exactly stop once you start down that slippery slope?