1) The ESRB gave the game a proper rating. That being said, the only people who seem to realize that gamers have grown up are the gamers themselves. AO should not be a gaming taboo. AO should be used more by the ESRB to make it clearer to people that a game is for an adult audience.

2) AO is similar to NC-17 in that both ratings are the death-knell of any release. However, people don't seem to understand how similar these 'adult' ratings are to their 'mature/restricted' counterpart. According to the MPAA, an R rated film means that anyone under 17 has to be accompanied by an adult (the film also includes strong language, violence, nudity, drug abuse, other elements, or a combination of the above). An NC-17 film means no one under 17 can enter the theater (the film also includes excessive violence, sex, aberrational behavior, drug abuse or any other elements which, when present, most parents would consider too strong and therefore off-limits for viewing by their children.) Now, the problem is, those two descriptions sound almost EXACTLY the same. There is no ADULT ONLY movie in reality because everything gets slammed into R (and NC-17 is considered a taboo). The gaming industry has the same problem. There is no ADULT ONLY rating. According to the ESRB, M refers to any game containing intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content and/or strong language. These games should not be played by anyone under 17 (although unenforceable outside of the game store). AO refers to any game containing prolonged scenes of intense violence and/or graphic sexual content and nudity. These games should not be played by anyone 18 or younger. (Again, unenforceable outside of a game store). Confused yet? AO has a 1-year gamer age difference and, essentially, no criteria difference from M. The two, together, essentially cancel each other out, making the need for an AO rating useless (and why no one wants their game rated as such).

3) If AO was used as a real rating, rather than a skull and cross bones, I think people would get the picture that (silly rabbit) games are for adults (too, ya boneheads). In addition, that games made for adults are also marketed for adult gamers. Also, AO is a no nonsense rating. I think parents would be much less inclined to purchase an ADULT ONLY game for a minor than a MATURE game. The ESRB should get out there and try to make the point that AO is a rating in place to protect kids from games that are really only to be played by ADULTS (meaning 18+). Not having that rating in place, continues to reinforce the misconception that gaming is still "just for kids".

4)Lastly, Manhunt 2 is a game asking for controversy. Now I'm not saying games like these shouldn't be made...that people should sacrifice artistic expression due to a persons misconception of what is or is not a game. But I do believe that people who want gaming to go away will love the mess that this game has made...and the noise it's generated among angry parents/religious leaders/and Jack Thompson-ites who have been waiting with guns at the ready to flame the living hell out of this game. It's irrational to thing that Take-Two was going to get away this releasing this game and think that no one would stop and say "uh...you do know what you've made here, right?" It'd be similar to me going into times square and drawing a big swastika on the ground and then saying "um...what's the big deal?" Developers should know better.