worth checking the comments at the end of the Leicester Mercury piece

http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=132935&command=displayContent&sourceNode=132702&contentPK=16600074&folderPk=77465&pNodeId=132393

If the facts of the case stand as they appear to be, these people are actually MORE off base than Jerk. They should be condemning real-life violence and the drugs that led to it, not cuddling up to this Vaz fellow. Maybe they didn't like their son playing Manhunt, maybe they saw him playing it and the casual, hyper-realistic violence appalled them, maybe its easier for them to vent againt a video game than a real person. But sheesh, get a clue...course I'm sure theres plenty of people nodding sagely and shaking their heads at the obvious (some people on the tele whose poor son got kilt said so) effects of video game violence on society

aww it wasn't that bad, I thought it great fun...

as to mindlessly violent...I'm not sure it was that much more violent than many other games, and the rationale for the plot of the game was sound enough for me...which was basically an excuse for loads of stealth kills and improvised weapons, but the violence was no more mindless than much of what I've seen in (bad) action movies, less so than many.

The one thing that makes Manhunt stick in certain peoples minds as being exceptional is that the game mechanic appears to be based directly on violence, rather than the violence being a means to an end. This is merely an illusion of the plot, such as it is. The object of the game is to escape, violence being the means. Pretty much bogstandard, actually. So what if I used a rusty bit of wire or a plastic bag instead of martial arts or a combat knife? Or a nail gun rather than a silenced Walther PPK or somesuch?

Much ado about nothing if you ask me...More ink for R*...