If you game can't make an M rating, people think it is too evil to be distributed. However currently that just does not seem to be the case. The problem is that people need to understand that just because something has the highest rating doesn't mean it should be shunned from the light, it just means it is something not for kids. The problem isn't Nintendo and Sony, the problem is this overall cultural idea that the highest rating = something really bad. Doesn't necessarily have to be ESRB, some games rate with PEGI instead (Civ 4) but if it isn't rated, expect nobody to stock it. It's an additional problem with games because you essentially can't release unrated, stores just refuse to carry games that don't feature a rating. Otherwise no console license, no distribution in almost every major retailer and so on. You get that hung on your game, you have to change it if you ever want widespread sales. For whatever reason, AO is assumed to mean a horrible porno and thus nobody will touch it. Well they can't release it with that rating, nobody will carry it, so instead they just release it 'unrated'. In the case of an R movie, that mean an NC-17 was what was going to be hung on the original cut. The only reason they go back and make cuts like that is if they couldn't get the rating they wanted with the original. Ok please, let's not be morons here, it's rating would be NC-17. So that was released later, but just not submitted for rating. However the theatrical version was not the cut the director originally wanted. American Pie received an R rating in the theatrical version. So Walmart and others will sell R rated movies and M rated games, but if you get an NC-17 or AO hung on it all of a sudden nobody wants to distribute it. For some reason, in everyone's mind, the highest rating = porno. Game makers would be fine with AO ratings except for the fact that they are a kiss of death.

Manhunt 2 esrb