Support NeoGAF

[Vow of Silence]

Its funny though, that tweet is so typical of another aspect of the current morality panic: getting offended on somebody else's behalf!

Tell us what you personally feel you are being denied by this censorship, what is it exactly that's being lost? Because if you don't have the moral conviction to actually defend it, and stand by it, I couldn't give a fuck about your fake outrage.

Its just a different flavor of virtue-signalling. The left have a shit-ton of it admittedly, but its not a monopoly. Whoever is doing it, its still just narcissitically creating cultural noise by saying "look at me", I'm anti- this thing.

I dunno. I think he appears to just be standing up and saying "enough of this shit please" on principle, based on it being the moral panic of a loud minority that he doesn't see as a good basis for any kind of content control. The other option is staying silent. I understand virtue signalling to be making a statement not because you believe in what you're saying but for the social approval you'll get from saying it. If you're really cynical you could try to make the case that everything anyone says in a public forum is a form of virtue signalling, but I don't believe that. Sometimes people say things that they know they're going to be attacked for, but have to say it anyway.

Has the cultural dynamic shifted so that the anti-SJW stuff is in the ascendant now? I don't think so, but I think there is definitely a growing backlash against it, and part of that backlash is people speaking up against it. Corporations are generally very much in line with the woke crowd still. Seeing as the target of these tweets is Sony, a massive corporation, and a 'new wave' of puritanism, I'd say it's a series of public statements trying to turn the tide rather than go with it. If 'go woke go broke' is even remotely true, this stuff will play itself out, not by a reversal and a sudden penchant by corporations to inject their PR with 1950's style chauvinism, but just the removal of the shriller moralising. Look what's happened with the massive layoffs at Buzzfeed, HuffPo etc. - all woke publications. Look at the Gillette advert thing. Where is this going? What is next? All very interesting.

 

[Aurelian]

But this is all assumption on your part. Perhaps it may be true for some people, but to claim that it's true for everyone who are interested in these games is nonsensical.

No, we've seen multiple examples where guys grouse about alleged censorship, provide a pic for reference... and it's a shot of anime girls in seductive poses. And there's been at least one thread devoted to griping about DoA Xtreme 3 (aka softcore masquerading as a game) not reaching the US. There are instances when it's not quite so obvious, such as the representation of Black Cat in Spider-Man, but c'mon... let's not pretend this is about preserving artistic vision.

 

[kevm3]

Except this isn't "Puritanism"

Feminists aren't Puritans and most of this censoring of 'sexy girls' in games is coming from them. These sjw types are devouring themselves

 

[The Mad Draklor]

No, we've seen multiple examples where guys grouse about alleged censorship, provide a pic for reference... and it's a shot of anime girls in seductive poses. And there's been at least one thread devoted to griping about DoA Xtreme 3 (aka softcore masquerading as a game) not reaching the US. There are instances when it's not quite so obvious, such as the representation of Black Cat in Spider-Man, but c'mon... let's not pretend this is about preserving artistic vision.

Dismissing people's criticisms against censorship as pretending to be concerned about artistic vision is not an argument. In fact, that is an unsubstantiated assertion only meant to character assassinate. Can't make a rebuttal? Then make the people making the criticisms look bad, I guess...

 

[CatCouch]

I'm not trying to justify censoring games in this case (it's their platform, though, they're free to do anything legal with it), just that the moaning and complaining frequently revolves around depictions that are clearly meant as a kind of softcore porn or pinup. They can't claim "it's not about wanting to masturbate!" while at the same time citing examples that are all about sexual stimulation. It's like insisting that you read Playboy for the articles... folks, just own up to what you really want, don't pretend this is about high-minded artistic integrity.

I don't quite follow your logic as it seems to blur the lines between finding something sexy and masturbating. There's a lot in between looking at sexy art and orgasm.

Pin-ups don't exist purely for masturbation. I draw everything from concept and pin-up art all the way up to full adult art and I can guarantee you art isn't as black and white as you are implying. I have people who commission me for pin-ups and show me prints of it they hang in their houses and I'm pretty sure it's not to jack off to.

The definition for porn is not set in stone, either. A good example is Patreon, they don't allow porn but define porn as real people. Art doesn't count as porn at all so I can draw adult art and get paid on Patreon. It's a complicated subject that deserves a lot more respect. I'm pretty tired of seeing sexy art written off as disposable. I've put a lot of my life into sexy art so I don't appreciate the argument that it's not "high-minded" enough to have artistic integrity.

Western games like Mass Effect had way more sexual content than what's being censored now so I'm afraid we are going backwards. Lots of people like the romance and sex scenes in those games, I know I did!

If the art is meant to be sexy then that is the vision. Censoring it and then claiming it doesn't impact the artistic integrity is crazy.

 

[Jubenhimer]

Puritanism is creeping into the entire corporate USA/Western world. In Formula 1, they fired all the grid girls (models in sexy outfits paid to hold driver names & numbers on the grid) in the belief it was outdated & "current year" morality = "cover up your wamenz or else ur a misogynist".

It's not exclusive to Sony. It's a social trend pushed by the corporate suits all over the west for xyz bullshit reasons.

It's a fad TBH. If something is seen as cool, companies will jump on the ban-wagon and milk it until it's run its course. Right now, Social Justice is the "It" thing at the moment. It'll blow over, and corporations will find some new trend to capitalize on and exploit.

 

[Aurelian]

Dismissing people's criticisms against censorship as pretending to be concerned about artistic vision is not an argument. In fact, that is an unsubstantiated assertion only meant to character assassinate. Can't make a rebuttal? Then make the people making the criticisms look bad, I guess...

It's not really character assassination so much as pointing out that they have an irrational level of outrage about the issue, and their examples of censorship are predictable almost to a fault. They act like they're on a moral crusade to preserve games against some horrible suppression of free speech... no, they just want to look at their anime titties. My argument is that it's not nearly as big a deal as they make it out to be.

 

[Aurelian]

I don't quite follow your logic as it seems to blur the lines between finding something sexy and masturbating. There's a lot in between looking at sexy art and orgasm.

Pin-ups don't exist purely for masturbation. I draw everything from concept and pin-up art all the way up to full adult art and I can guarantee you art isn't as black and white as you are implying. I have people who commission me for pin-ups and show me prints of it they hang in their houses and I'm pretty sure it's not to jack off to.

The definition for porn is not set in stone, either. A good example is Patreon, they don't allow porn but define porn as real people. Art doesn't count as porn at all so I can draw adult art and get paid on Patreon. It's a complicated subject that deserves a lot more respect. I'm pretty tired of seeing sexy art written off as disposable. I've put a lot of my life into sexy art so I don't appreciate the argument that it's not "high-minded" enough to have artistic integrity.

Western games like Mass Effect had way more sexual content than what's being censored now so I'm afraid we are going backwards. Lots of people like the romance and sex scenes in those games, I know I did!

If the art is meant to be sexy then that is the vision. Censoring it and then claiming it doesn't impact the artistic integrity is crazy.

I didn't intend to paint it quite so simply, so my apologies for that. I know there are artistic pin-ups and other forms of erotic art that aren't meant strictly for stimulation, and that the work that is intended that way still has artistic merits.

My beef is more that many are trying to paint it as a noble crusade when that's not really what they're aiming for in this case. Folks, you can admit it, you want to get hard while you're playing and don't like that Sony would rather not have certain representations of sexuality (especially since some examples show girls who look like they could be underage). You can certainly complain about it and take your business elsewhere, but don't try to frame it as a grave injustice... it's not.

 

[Thiagosc777]

It's the obsession with it that's the issue. You'd think you were depriving some people of water the way they complain about covered-up female characters. And like StreetsofBeige said, the complaints frequently revolve around costumes and poses that are clearly meant to arouse horny boys, not the mere presence of sexy characters. They're looking for softcore porn and can't even admit it.

No, it is art. It is a way of establishing an aesthetic and style. For example, take a look at this album cover from one of my favorite bands, Cradle of Filth:

The nudity is part of the whole idea of witches consorting with Satan.

Again, if you are a prude, everything you see is pornographic.

 

[Thiagosc777]

It's not really character assassination so much as pointing out that they have an irrational level of outrage about the issue, and their examples of censorship are predictable almost to a fault. They act like they're on a moral crusade to preserve games against some horrible suppression of free speech... no, they just want to look at their anime titties. My argument is that it's not nearly as big a deal as they make it out to be.

What is irrational about it? They are severely restricting the ability of people to communicate ideas through games. People have a reason to be upset.

It'd be analogous to arbitrarily requiring people to write only using 3 vowels and 10 consonants. Can it be done? Perhaps, but it is a retarded restriction that serves no purpose and hinders our ability to communicate.

 

[Fuz]

Again, if you are a prude, everything you see is pornographic.

Pretty much this.

 

[Cunth]

Who is the person pushing this at Sony USA?

 

[CatCouch]

I didn't intend to paint it quite so simply, so my apologies for that. I know there are artistic pin-ups and other forms of erotic art that aren't meant strictly for stimulation, and that the work that is intended that way still has artistic merits.

My beef is more that many are trying to paint it as a noble crusade when that's not really what they're aiming for in this case. Folks, you can admit it, you want to get hard while you're playing and don't like that Sony would rather not have certain representations of sexuality (especially since some examples show girls who look like they could be underage). You can certainly complain about it and take your business elsewhere, but don't try to frame it as a grave injustice... it's not.

I'm pretty certain that the lack of transparency is causing a lot of the backlash. Sony not telling us (and maybe not even developers) what has to be censored naturally breeds fear. If developers don't know what they can and can't make there is a problem. The unknown is what makes it a continual issue.

If I had no idea what I could or couldn't post on Patreon and could just lose that income at any moment I would be terrified. How can an artist (or game developer) work with confidence if they can be blocked by a policy that has no set rules?

Sony is a leader in the industry so it's not as simple as going somewhere else. I bought Sony systems because they were the place for Japanese games, now I have to hope that games come to other platforms uncensored and I have to hope enough people follow to make that financially a viable option for these games. Uprooting from a platform that has been home for decades is pretty hard.

No matter how much you downplay it, this is a very worrying precedent for Sony to set. Banning art already accepted by the ESRB is concerning, especially with the lack of explanation.

 

[JunkerWoland]

Who is the person pushing this at Sony USA?

There's no named individual. Comments from developers over the last few months suggest a group within Sony's US-based entertainment division (SIE) is responsible for this new content oversight. In general, there's a good bit of confusion, because there doesn't seem to be an actual set policy.

 

[CatCouch]

No, it is art. It is a way of establishing an aesthetic and style. For example, take a look at this album cover from one of my favorite bands, Cradle of Filth:

The nudity is part of the whole idea of witches consorting with Satan.

Again, if you are a prude, everything you see is pornographic.

I love that album. Blackest Magick in Practice is such a good song. It's one of my favorite album covers ever, too!

 

[Aurelian]

No, it is art. It is a way of establishing an aesthetic and style. For example, take a look at this album cover from one of my favorite bands, Cradle of Filth:

The nudity is part of the whole idea of witches consorting with Satan.

Again, if you are a prude, everything you see is pornographic.

I'm not sure why you're trying to label me as a prude who hates all sexuality in media. I absolutely don't. I think that album art is fine, if clearly intended to be provocative.

My gripe is that there isn't really a noble, all-important crusade to be had here. The examples men here tend to cite for games are... anime girls in seductive poses. It's art intended explicitly for horny boys wanting to get their rocks off. I wouldn't ban it myself, but I also think it's hilarious to watch a bunch of supposedly 'mature' men work themselves into a frenzy because Sony makes it harder for them to fantasize about fucking an imaginary girl in a hot tub. This isn't the hill you should choose to die on.

 

[LegendOfKage]

The funny thing is that they claim buyers don't care for "censorship," but the boring reality is that they also don't care much about that content going away, either. Most people don't play games to masturbate to scantily clad anime girls; they're there to play.

Most people don't care about X, so it's fine if X is removed is poor logic. By the nature of them being video games, that's going to be true. Hypothetically speaking, if most people who play games don't care about LGBT characters, would it then be acceptable for Microsoft to decide no developers can put LGBT characters in their games, because people buy the games either way?

The answer is no.

I didn't say that. The point is that you're not necessarily justified simply by complaining. Ever been in a service job and had a customer throw a tantrum over something that didn't really matter? I see a lot of that in the gaming community.

Ever been in a service job where a customer says "Hi, your store used to do this, and now you've changed things. I liked it more before, and as a longtime customer, I think you should change it back." And then did you ever turn to your customer and say "well you only think that because you're entitled and uneducated!" Because I see a lot of THAT in the gaming industry.

It's the obsession with it that's the issue. You'd think you were depriving some people of water the way they complain about covered-up female characters. And like StreetsofBeige said, the complaints frequently revolve around costumes and poses that are clearly meant to arouse horny boys, not the mere presence of sexy characters. They're looking for softcore porn and can't even admit it.

It's my opinion that you sound like a conservative Christian talking about Night Trap 25 years ago. If you disagree with that, please tell me what has changed, and how the way you feel now is different than the way they felt then.

 

[Dacon]

My beef is more that many are trying to paint it as a noble crusade when that's not really what they're aiming for in this case. Folks, you can admit it, you want to get hard while you're playing and don't like that Sony would rather not have certain representations of sexuality (especially since some examples show girls who look like they could be underage). You can certainly complain about it and take your business elsewhere, but don't try to frame it as a grave injustice... it's not.

Who are you to arrogantly declare what peoples intentions and motivations are for them? Get off your high horse and stop trying diminish how people feel about this shit as the just wanting to masturbate to cartoons. You have no idea how anyone feels about anything unless they tell you, so maybe you should make an argument that doesn't involve you presupposing why people feel the way they do.

Also, obligatory comment about this not just being about men, plenty of women enjoy these kinds of games and depictions of female characters, go to any convention where cosplay is allowed or just cruise twitch streams for a night.

 

[The Mad Draklor]

It's not really character assassination so much as pointing out that they have an irrational level of outrage about the issue, and their examples of censorship are predictable almost to a fault. They act like they're on a moral crusade to preserve games against some horrible suppression of free speech... no, they just want to look at their anime titties. My argument is that it's not nearly as big a deal as they make it out to be.

Again, that is your interpretation and it's entirely subjective. Nothing you have spoken is objective nor substantiated. You only speak for yourself and thus, your claims that people who oppose censorship are pretending to be for creative freedom are unfounded.

The outrage is also not just coming from the consumers, but some of the developers, as well. Compile Heart, for example, called out Sony on their policy on Twitter a few days ago. XSEED said that it was because of Sony's policy that Senran Kagura Re:Newal's localization had to be delayed. Another Japanese developer said that if they had a Steam version of one of their games ready, it would be out within a week. Not to mention that even if certain games are for Japan only, the developers have to communicate with Sony HQ in English-only during US hours. That is quite a bit of red tape that unnecessarily adds more time and money for these developers/publishers.

But hey, keep saying that it's only about looking at anime tiddies. Clearly it's not about creative freedom and treating small developers with respect. When you say it an octillion times, it must be true, right?

 

[Rock And Roll]

Its funny though, that tweet is so typical of another aspect of the current morality panic: getting offended on somebody else's behalf!

Tell us what you personally feel you are being denied by this censorship, what is it exactly that's being lost? Because if you don't have the moral conviction to actually defend it, and stand by it, I couldn't give a fuck about your fake outrage.

Its just a different flavor of virtue-signalling. The left have a shit-ton of it admittedly, but its not a monopoly. Whoever is doing it, its still just narcissitically creating cultural noise by saying "look at me", I'm anti- this thing.

Being anti-cencorship doesn't mean you are faking outrage. I thought Eminem was puerile garbage but I never thought his music should be censored. I don't believe in it regardless if it's games/music/movies/art etc... If someone wants to create it, that is up to them and if the public wants to consume it, that is also their decision. Sony does not have to decide for us what we will and will not be able to support.

I'm not getting up in arms about this topic but I can see why others are and I support them being able to voice their concerns

 

[Pallas]

I thought they were only trying to censor underage look-a-likes but we know by now this has even hit their themes, some that are clearly of age.

This isn’t about just censoring underage characters(which honestly I’m not for or against) but if this continues to pick of steam it may have bigger influences on bigger games. It already hit DoAExtreme recent game.

If they don’t censor the sexual content of major third party and first party games then there is clearly a double standard against artistic style and I don’t mean characters that look like 12.

 

[Shin]

Not to backseat moderate, but it's nice to actually have a proper discussion about the issue especially now that someone of standing spoke his mind.
If you don't care about this subject or it disgusts you then do yourself a favor and ignore the topic altogether so those that find the issue concerning can discuss without the derail.

 

[Aurelian]

Most people don't care about X, so it's fine if X is removed is poor logic. By the nature of them being video games, that's going to be true. Hypothetically speaking, if most people who play games don't care about LGBT characters, would it then be acceptable for Microsoft to decide no developers can put LGBT characters in their games, because people buy the games either way?

The answer is no.

It's more that you shouldn't get worked up into a tizzy about this. Sony isn't ruining gaming; it's shaping the image it wants for its games, which could have some unfortunate effects but isn't the end of the world.

Ever been in a service job where a customer says "Hi, your store used to do this, and now you've changed things. I liked it more before, and as a longtime customer, I think you should change it back." And then did you ever turn to your customer and say "well you only think that because you're entitled and uneducated!" Because I see a of THAT in the gaming industry.

Sometimes that's a legitimate gripe, other times that really is just entitlement. I remember when convenience stores would frequently sell full-on porn magazines (and I don't mean Playboy); that doesn't mean these stores were worse off when they decided to stop carrying those magazines, even if there was a contingent who no doubt got upset and took their business elsewhere.

One of the greatest dangers of any business is confusing a small but very vocal group of customers with your larger base. Sony's core market is not the guy who thrives on imported Japanese games and panics when steam obscures a girl's chest in a hot tub scene. It's the much, much larger contingent of people who just want to have fun and don't care

It's my opinion that you sound like a conservative Christian talking about Night Trap 25 years ago. If you disagree with that, please tell me what has changed, and how the way you feel now is different than the way they felt then.

I'm definitely not a conservative Christian. Night Trap had its problems, but it was pretty tame in practice. And my objection is not that there's sexuality presented in these games -- it's that there's a whole contingent of guys freaking out over what's really a minor issue, and being disingenuous about why they want that content to stay.

 

[The Mad Draklor]

You know which game on the PS4 is the closest to being "pornographic"? The Order: 1886. That game literally had a scene where a prostitute was having sex at a brothel. If you explored the brothel at the ground floor, there was another prostitute with her boobs completely uncovered. Now I challenge those to find a Japanese game on the PS4 that has full-on intercourse or complete exposure of boobs.

 

[DigitalScrap]

You can, but that doesn't mean you're justified in doing so. Sometimes it's just overly entitled whining.

Much like those who complain about sex, fictional characters sexual "identity" (and lack of representation), and the sexualization of female characters that don't have "agency" (I hate it when people refer to a fictional character that doesn't even exist as being persecuted and lacking "agency")?

I wish those people cared about those issues in the real world and would take their "action" there.

 

[Aurelian]

Who are you to arrogantly declare what peoples intentions and motivations are for them? Get off your high horse and stop trying diminish how people feel about this shit as the just wanting to masturbate to cartoons. You have no idea how anyone feels about anything unless they tell you, so maybe you should make an argument that doesn't involve you presupposing why people feel the way they do.

Also, obligatory comment about this not just being about men, plenty of women enjoy these kinds of games and depictions of female characters, go to any convention where cosplay is allowed or just cruise twitch streams for a night.

Well, tell me, why is it so important to see that T&A? Do you really think complainers are trying to appreciate the artistic merits of those images, that they believe it's crucial to understanding the lead game designer's oeuvre? C'mon, man, it's not arrogance, I'm just using basic logic.

And yes, of course some women enjoy these games. I'm not saying they don't. What I am saying is that it's hilarious to see guys throw a gigantic fit over something that doesn't really matter and then pretend it has nothing to do with their raging libidos.

 

[DigitalScrap]

And yes, of course some women enjoy these games. I'm not saying they don't. What I am saying is that it's hilarious to see guys throw a gigantic fit over something that doesn't really matter and then pretend it has nothing to do with their raging libidos.

Has it really been a "gigantic fit" though? I keep seeing people who are okay with censorship acting as if those who are against censorship are rioting in the streets, burning their PlayStations, and throwing bricks through the windows of Sony HQ. All I'm seeing is people saying that they don't like it, and won't support it. And then people saying that they are wrong for having a different opinion. A lot of hyperbole, IMO.

 

[Aurelian]

Much like those who complain about sex, fictional characters sexual "identity" (and lack of representation), and the sexualization of female characters that don't have "agency" (I hate it when people refer to a fictional character that doesn't even exist as being persecuted and lacking "agency")?

I wish those people cared about those issues in the real world and would take their "action" there.

They often do care about it in the real world; it's not a mutually exclusive thing.

As I see it, it's good to make games a more inclusive place, and that means representing women and minorities as more than just trophies and background objects. But it is important to remember that these are video game characters, and that a game isn't bad so long as it isn't being out-and-out bigoted.

 

[Aurelian]

Has it really been a "gigantic fit" though? I keep seeing people who are okay with censorship acting as if those who are against censorship are rioting in the streets, burning their PlayStations, and throwing bricks through the windows of Sony HQ. All I'm seeing is people saying that they don't like it, and won't support it. And then people saying that they are wrong for having a different opinion. A lot of hyperbole, IMO.

Well, it's enough of a fit that people on NeoGAF regularly devote entire threads to it and mount passionate defenses claiming that Sony will struggle if it continues its policy. If it wasn't really that much of an issue for them, they wouldn't rail against it seemingly non-stop. To borrow from Hamlet, methinks they doth protest too much.

 

[DigitalScrap]

They often do care about it in the real world; it's not a mutually exclusive thing.

As I see it, it's good to make games a more inclusive place, and that means representing women and minorities as more than just trophies and background objects. But it is important to remember that these are video game characters, and that a game isn't bad so long as it isn't being out-and-out bigoted.

I'm ALL for inclusion. As a non-White social liberal, I've long lamented the lack of representation of all people in media. But to begin demanding things be excluded in the name of inclusion is silly. There seems to be an online horde ready to ban all things they don't like. I say how about we just celebrate that some games are becoming more inclusive, and not demand that every damn game check off some group's personal lists of wants? Why can't there simply be diverse choices available that then can suit all people's tastes? It shouldn't be that every game released from this point on has nothing that will offend someone's sensitivities.

Games that I don't like for one reason or another, I don't buy. I don't want to stop someone else from buying it though. It doesn't offend me that the game exists.

 

[The Mad Draklor]

Well, tell me, why is it so important to see that T&A? Do you really think complainers are trying to appreciate the artistic merits of those images, that they believe it's crucial to understanding the lead game designer's oeuvre? C'mon, man, it's not arrogance, I'm just using basic logic.

Tell me why it is so important to have the T&A removed? Do you really think that all people critical of censorship are using their concern for creative freedom as a disguise? Whatever logic you are using, it is far from basic. In fact, the questions that you posit miss the point of Dacon's argument. You only speak for yourself and thus far, you only made a bunch of assertions without evidence.

And yes, of course some women enjoy these games. I'm not saying they don't. What I am saying is that it's hilarious to see guys throw a gigantic fit over something that doesn't really matter and then pretend it has nothing to do with their raging libidos.

Ah, so creative freedom does not matter to you. And apparently, it doesn't matter to you that Japanese developers have to spend unnecessary additional time and money to communicate with Sony in English-only during US hours just to get their games approved. It's quite unique to see someone who's both anti-consumer and anti-business.

 

[InterMusketeer]

Well, it's enough of a fit that people on NeoGAF regularly devote entire threads to it and mount passionate defenses claiming that Sony will struggle if it continues its policy.

Oh shit, we better call the police then! No, wait, we need the army!

If it wasn't really that much of an issue for them, they wouldn't rail against it seemingly non-stop.

What is "that much of an issue" though?
How much can they complain about Sony's new policy?
How many threads and/or posts can they make on NeoGAF and elsewhere?

Or could it be you're just sitting in this thread, complaining that other people are complaining about an issue you personally don't think is important? Or perhaps you're actually happy with Sony's new policy that forces developers that rely on their platform to censor their games, and that's why you're here defending it?

 

[CatCouch]

You know which game on the PS4 is the closest to being "pornographic"? The Order: 1886. That game literally had a scene where a prostitute was having sex at a brothel. If you explored the brothel at the ground floor, there was another prostitute with her boobs completely uncovered. Now I challenge those to find a Japanese game on the PS4 that has full-on intercourse or complete exposure of boobs.

Shadows of the Damned back on the PS3 was the only Japanese game that had female breasts I can remember.

I know many didn't play it but Agony, while censored for some content on console, had full frontal male nudity with penis physics and lots of jiggling breasts. You could possess female demons and naked men with generous physics. I had fun walking around looking at my characters dong flop around. There were orgies in the backgrounds, too. I played it on the PS4 and it came out last May!

 

[ethomaz]

I just have one question...

Which PlayStation game this guy worked?

I mean from the games he worked only Diablo 3 was on PlayStation and it was a late port with identical content of the PC version he worked.

So how Sony censored something not developed to their platform???

 

[Dacon]

Well, tell me, why is it so important to see that T&A? Do you really think complainers are trying to appreciate the artistic merits of those images, that they believe it's crucial to understanding the lead game designer's oeuvre? C'mon, man, it's not arrogance, I'm just using basic logic.

How is presuming to know how someone feels not arrogance? I like seeing these things because attractive women make me happy and are nice to see. Do you think everyone who sees something sexy/pretty immediately feels the urge to masturbate? Maybe you do and that's why youre so determined to support this side of the argument, idk.

I don't lament the absence of sexual imagery or attractive characters much if it was never a priority for the developers of the game or never had a presence in said game series beforehand, but when someone is actively getting in the way of people who want to provide this kind of content to the people who want it, it's a problem.

And yes, of course some women enjoy these games. I'm not saying they don't. What I am saying is that it's hilarious to see guys throw a gigantic fit over something that doesn't really matter and then pretend it has nothing to do with their raging libidos.

Who are you to decide what matters to whom? Ok, so why don't you prove it's all about their libidos and not about the fact that someone is trying to take something they like away from them, which people generally do not react well to? It seems like all you really want to do here is attack men and their intentions for whatever reason.

 

[DigitalScrap]

I just have one question...

Which PlayStation game this guy worked?

I mean from the games he worked only Diablo 3 was on PlayStation and it was a late port with identical content of the PC version he worked.

So how Sony censored something not developed to their platform???

So if he hasn't worked on a game on PlayStation, he can't speak about his thoughts on Sony's apparent stance on selective censorship? Is that what you are trying to say? He can't speak out about Sony's new policies unless his game is affected?

Are only certain opinions allowed to be shared now? Sheesh.

 

[ethomaz]

So if he hasn't worked on a game on PlayStation, he can't speak about his thoughts on Sony's apparent stance on selective censorship? Is that what you are trying to say? He can't speak out about Sony's new policies unless his game is affected?

Are only certain opinions allowed to be shared now? Sheesh.

I’m saying how can he be censored by Sony if he never worked in a game for the Platform...

Seems more like tales I hear from my friends, uncle, cousin, etc.

Actually what type of censorship he received from Sony? Sounds weird to criticize something he didn’t experienced.

I can understand if he is talking as a player and not developer... but the news uses him as a dev so maybe the news is bad written?

 

[Clear]

Being anti-cencorship doesn't mean you are faking outrage. I thought Eminem was puerile garbage but I never thought his music should be censored. I don't believe in it regardless if it's games/music/movies/art etc... If someone wants to create it, that is up to them and if the public wants to consume it, that is also their decision. Sony does not have to decide for us what we will and will not be able to support.

I'm not getting up in arms about this topic but I can see why others are and I support them being able to voice their concerns

I've been anti-censorship forever, but this isn't actually censorship, its PR. Strictly speaking its image management.
Censorship is about proscribing material within a certain territory or jurisdiction, preventing anyone from making it available under penalty of law or economics*.

Basically by moving all product approval to a single location, the intent I assume is to set a global standard for content, and naturally the nature of the standard is what is felt to be reflective of current cultural mores in the place of institution. Effectively its cultural imperialism, but the motivation isn't moral or political, its basically risk aversion in service of the bottom-line.

In that respect its actually understandable from a pure business standpoint, particularly given the present climate. The point though is that one provider restricting content to what they feel to be brand-appropriate isn't censorship per se. Its like asking why when Disney branched out from their traditional family-friendly offerings, they resurrected/created separate marques to release under. The reason is obvious.


*Economic censorship is when the law makes is such that although a type of material is not illegal, selling it is restricted in such a way that it becomes non-viable economically. How the French authorities killed theatrical porno in the 80's is a great example of this.

 

[DigitalScrap]

I’m saying how can he be censored by Sony if he never worked in a game for the Platform...

Seems more like tales I hear from my friends, uncle, cousin, etc.

Actually what type of censorship he received from Sony? Sounds weird to criticize something he didn’t experienced.

So unless *I* am personally censored, I can't speak up about my dislike of Sony's new censorship policy? Many of the games affected are not even games I would likely buy, but I'm still against censorship in an attempt to placate a confused and entitled group that thinks that only their worldview should exist.

Why can't someone in the gaming industry be concerned about Sony's stance even if their own creations have not been affected?

Who gets to decide what people can complain about? Is there an arbiter that we should all consult before we state our opinions?

 

[ethomaz]

So unless *I* am personally censored, I can't speak up about my dislike of Sony's new censorship policy? Many of the games affected are not even games I would likely buy, but I'm still against censorship in an attempt to placate a confused and entitled group that thinks that only their worldview should exist.

Why can't someone in the gaming industry be concerned about Sony's stance even if their own creations have not been affected?

Who gets to decide what people can complain about? Is there an arbiter that we should all consult before we state our opinions?

He as a dev is different from a gamer.

Like I said I have no issue with a player saying the censorship is bullshit.

But I expect a dev to show at least some experience and real facts about what kind and how Sony US is censorship the development of games.

So feel weird a dev talk about something that didn’t happened with him... you are inside the industry so your word take a weigh that needs more than actually criticism without evidence.

 

[Lucumo]

There's a lot more sex and cussing in stuff I've seen in European media, but I think some countries like Germany (and Aussie down south) have violence limits????

Germany is slowly feeling the influence coming from the US. Games like Gears of War 3 and Mortal Kombat X were uncensored while some games from Japan featuring naked skin are censored...which is funny, considering we used to have games with full nudity.

I have never heard once that any of these sexualized anime games have such great gameplay, everything else can be ignored. It's all about images of young girls showing cleavage and upskirts, wrapped around some mundane storyline (which nobody has ever brought up in any thread).

It's your fault when you don't care in the first place then.

 

[The Mad Draklor]

He as a dev is different from a gamer.

Like I said I have no issue with a player saying the censorship is bullshit.

But I expect a dev to show at least some experience and real facts about what kind and how Sony US is censorship the development of games.

So feel weird a dev talk about something that didn’t happened with him.

Those two things are not mutually exclusive. And the real facts have been available for quite some time now. Look up the developer of Silverio Trinity's comments on Sony's policy or XSEED's announcement of the reason for Senran Kagura Re:Newal's western release delay. Compile Heart took a jab at Sony on Twitter.

 

[Moneal]

I've been anti-censorship forever, but this isn't actually censorship, its PR. Strictly speaking its image management.
Censorship is about proscribing material within a certain territory or jurisdiction, preventing anyone from making it available under penalty of law or economics*.

Basically by moving all product approval to a single location, the intent I assume is to set a global standard for content, and naturally the nature of the standard is what is felt to be reflective of current cultural mores in the place of institution. Effectively its cultural imperialism, but the motivation isn't moral or political, its basically risk aversion in service of the bottom-line.

In that respect its actually understandable from a pure business standpoint, particularly given the present climate. The point though is that one provider restricting content to what they feel to be brand-appropriate isn't censorship per se. Its like asking why when Disney branched out from their traditional family-friendly offerings, they resurrected/created separate marques to release under. The reason is obvious.


*Economic censorship is when the law makes is such that although a type of material is not illegal, selling it is restricted in such a way that it becomes non-viable economically. How the French authorities killed theatrical porno in the 80's is a great example of this.

So you admit its censorship but try to redefine censorship so that a company doing so is not censorship?

 

[DigitalScrap]

He as a dev is different from a gamer.

Like I said I have no issue with a player saying the censorship is bullshit.

But I expect a dev to show at least some experience and real facts about what kind and how Sony US is censorship the development of games.

So feel weird a dev talk about something that didn’t happened with him... you are inside the industry so your word take a weigh that needs more than actually criticism without evidence.

Developers are part of our community as well. And guess what? Developers were gamers before they decided to make games for a living.

 

[Isa]

The Love of my life was the first to get upset. She got me into Senran Kagura, and has every collector's edition, the anime, etc. I love these types of games too, they are fun to play, often have great animations and physics, and interesting characters with some surprising backstories. I understand where she is coming from feeling like one of her fave series is being "lessened".

We love sexuality and femininity in art from all eras of human existence, it speaks to us. Visiting classical architecture, sculptures, and frilly baroque galleries is quite fun. And just because we like to see T&A doesn't mean we're gettin' rock hard and wet. Jesus what a base assumption.

Among my biggest grievances with Sony through all of this is how it feels they're throwing those of us who've supported them since gen 1 under the bus for the sake of image rebranding. They let the Vita die a pathetic death and just leeched off the consumer until it was enough. Unless I see some changes at Sony or a reason to invest in one, I'm skipping PS5 for now. And just like I thought I'd never get an Xbox this gen I never thought I'd say that.

 

[Dacon]

Developers are part of our community as well. And guess what? Developers were gamers before they decided to make games for a living.

Developers are gamers even after they started making games for a living.

 

[Dacon]

The Love of my life was the first to get upset. She got me into Senran Kagura, and has every collector's edition, the anime, etc. I love these types of games too, they are fun to play, often have great animations and physics, and interesting characters with some surprising backstories. I understand where she is coming from feeling like one of her fave series is being "lessened".

We love sexuality and femininity in art from all eras of human existence, it speaks to us. Visiting classical architecture, sculptures, and frilly baroque galleries is quite fun. And just because we like to see T&A doesn't mean we're gettin' rock hard and wet. Jesus what a base assumption.

Among my biggest grievances with Sony through all of this is how it feels they're throwing those of us who've supported them since gen 1 under the bus for the sake of image rebranding. They let the Vita die a pathetic death and just leeched off the consumer until it was enough. Unless I see some changes at Sony or a reason to invest in one, I'm skipping PS5 for now. And just like I thought I'd never get an Xbox this gen I never thought I'd say that.

Clearly you are not being honest about your need to fap to anime tiddies being your primary motivation.

 

[DigitalScrap]

Developers are gamers even after they started making games for a living.

Oh, I know. I was just saying that to make my point clear that what he was saying is nonsense.

 

[Isa]

Clearly you are not being honest about your need to fap to anime tiddies being your primary motivation.

Damn, caught me red-handed!

 

[EverydayBeast]

Haha there’s parental controls anyway. You should be able to make whatever game you want given there are warning labels