The Manhunt 2 ban raised as many questions as it did eyebrows. In the wake of the BBFC’s decision Play speaks to the BBFC and industry executives, to investigate the real reasons behind the ban and what its ramifications might be...

Many gamers and industry players felt that the BBFC’s decision to ban Manhunt 2 was proof videogames are treated unfairly when it comes to censorship, and that the media -led witch hunt of so-called ‘videogame nasties’ is starting to influence state censorship bodies. Play put these points to BBFC representative Sue Clark who, unsurprisingly, strongly disagrees.

"We have only banned two videogames in the last ten years," says Clark. "We don’t think videogames have been treated unfairly at all; to put it into perspective, we banned a ‘porn’ DVD this year and no one complained about that."

According to Clark, the BBFC believes horror films with very graphic violence, such as Saw and Hostel, sit within a "known genre", and that film goers "know what to expect" when they watch them. She also suggested that video games are commonly viewed as children's entertainment, and the BBFC has to take into consideration that children have increased access to games.

"We see around 17,000 films, DVDs and games a year so we are in a far better position to judge these sorts of things than anyone else," says Clark.

The BBFC may be in a better position to pass judgement but it also operates on some flawed assumptions. For instance, the ‘horror genre’ is just as established in videogames as it is in film, and gamers know exactly what to expect from titles such as Silent Hill, or Resident Evil. To say anything other would insinuate that gamers are a less informed group of consumers than film-goers (the opposite is more likely the case).

Clark may be correct when she says children have more access to adult-only videogames than they do to adult-only films, but banning a game like Manhunt 2 is not going to solve that. Parents need to recognise that videogames are designed for adults as well as children. Outlawing adult titles will only reinforce the outdated belief that videogames are mere toys, and exacerbate the very problem the BBFC wants to solve.

However, Clark says the main reason videogames are judged differently to film is because the BBFC believes their interactivity makes them more influential – a view also prevalent in the mainstream media. But, as Chris Mottes, CEO of Deadline Games, argues, there is no conclusive evidence to prove this assumption.

"According to the scientific studies that I have read, there is no correlation between interactivity and the player’s subsequent behaviour or the strength of their experience," says Mottes. "As I understand it, people are equally affected by different media and that the subject matter is more influential than the form. I believe the same criteria should be applied in classification."

Mottes’ view is shared by the former head of ELSPA, Roger Bennett, who says the BBFC’s belief that violent videogames are more influential than violent films is "flawed", as most experts agree that there have been insufficient studies on the matter, and the ones that have been conducted have produced inconclusive data.

The UK and Germany are the only countries in Europe that have state authorised censorship bodies that dictate to citizens what they can and cannot watch or play. It is worrying enough that the BBFC has the power to ban a videogame like Manhunt 2, let alone that they do so on the back of ‘scientific data’ that is inconclusive.

Vince Desi, the outspoken CEO of Running With Scissors, and creator of the infamous Postal series, tells Play that the interactivity of videogames should not even be an issue when it comes to their classification, irrespective of scientific evidence.

"The first issue is freedom," comments Desi. "Do we live in a free society? A game is a product. Sure, it’s inherently different than other mediums or consumable forms of entertainment, but the issue shouldn’t be how it’s consumed, the issue is CAN YOU CONSUME it? Buy it? Play it?"

Desi resolutely condemns the BBFC’s banning of Manhunt 2, calling it "disgusting". However, he also hopes that the ban will prompt some serious debate over adult videogames, and act as a step toward gaming gaining further credibility and acceptance as a form of adult entertainment.

"I’m praying that this Manhunt thing becomes the catalyst we need," says Desi. "For Running With Scissors I really believe it can be helpful in that it is forcing all the critics to look more carefully at what a game is really about. The Postal franchise has been the scapegoat of the industry for the past ten years. Now finally people, reviewers, the press, are starting to see and enjoy the satiric humour that Postal is all about. It’s psychotherapy on a CD."

Chris Mottes is not so optimistic. He believes that the BBFC’s decision has set a dangerous precedent that implies videogames should be subject to more restrictions than other media, and that it is entirely possible these extra restrictions could impact content other than graphic violence.

"I grew up in a country [South Africa] where censorship was rife," says Mottes. "Once you have the right to censor in place, how do you control what that right to censorship is being used for? Whose morals are the right ones? Initially it seems benign, but the move from moral censorship to political censorship is very small."

The UK may be a world away from apartheid South Africa, but Mottes’ point is not as outlandish as you might think. If the BBFC believes that violence in a videogame is more damaging than violence in a film, because of its interactivity, then surely the same logic should apply to other forms of content that is interactive. For instance, what if a videogame featured an overtly racist or sexist main character? Will the player identify more with that character’s views because they interact with it?

Mottes’ Mexican-themed PSP shooter Chilli Con Carnage was attacked in the media for using racial stereotypes. As Mottes points out, though, his game contains nowhere near the level of racism found in a popular film such as The Departed. Yet there is no media outrage over Scorsese’s ubiquitous use of the n-word. Could the seemingly unfair treatment of videogames by censorship bodies such as the BBFC be a result of the vilification of videogames in the mainstream media?

The US media, for instance, singled out violent videogames in the Columbine massacre, ignoring the reasons that the killers themselves put forward for why they shot their classmates; and the media’s initial reaction to the Virginia Tech massacre was to assume, on the back of no evidence, that perpetrator Sueng-Hui Cho was a regular Counter-Strike player, although it turned out Cho didn’t even own any videogames.

Such baseless hysteria – and there are many more examples we could cite – has real potential to influence state censorship laws, according to Mottes: "In my experience, morally righteous, fanatical religious groupings of all creeds, or populist politicians looking for free PR in our sensationalist driven press, will be the most vocal initially, and they will fast become the de facto standard for what the guidelines for censorship should be," he argues.

It is alarming to think that a government-supported body could engineer videogame censorship policies based on the sensationalism of the mass media. However, that is precisely what happened in Germany, following Robert Steinhaeuser’s slaying of 18 people in an eastern German school in 2002.

Because of the incident the German government introduced the toughest censorship and classification laws on videogames in Europe. But there was no evidence that videogames had anything to do with the killings. Steinhaeuser just happened to be a Counter-Strike player, like millions of other young males across the world.

In July 2006 UK tabloids reported that the mother of murder victim Stefan Pakeerah claimed her son’s killer was obsessed with Manhunt (it eventually turned out Pakeerah played Manhunt, and not his killer). The media circus that followed caused two of the country’s most prominent retailers, GAME and Dixons, among several others, to withdraw Manhunt from shop shelves, even though the BBFC passed the game completely uncut with an 18 certificate.

Retailers’ refusal to sell Manhunt effectively undermined the BBFC’s authority and was a slap in the face of a censorship body entrusted to protect the public from dangerous entertainment. If a similar fiasco occurred over Manhunt 2, public and government confidence in the BBFC’s procedures would certainly weaken. Could the Manhunt 2 ban therefore be pre-emptive action against such a scenario?

It seems the BBFC is letting itself get caught up in the same series of events that led to knee-jerk banning of "video nasties" in the Eighties, which were also the subject of media outrage, and erroneously blamed for various murders. Films like The Evil Dead and Cannibal Holocaust now look positively tame compared to Saw or Hostel, and have since been released to little moral outcry.

But even recent history repeats itself and, given time, it is inevitable games will earn the same degree of respect afforded to other mediums that endured hostile reactions during their infancy, as Mottes explains.

"I remember when television was launched in South Africa in 1975 and how people worried about the effect it would have on the youth of the day," says Mottes. "I think it’s a natural process when there is a change as radical as this, going from audio to video, video to interactivity. We need to stand our ground and prove our worth; time will do the rest."