Sony Succeed in Pressuring MS to Censor Game as Gal Gun Remaster will not release on Xbox

[Abby_TheLastofUs]

14 minutes ago, Undead Wolf said:

These games have an audience. If Microsoft could have offered something that Sony no longer does, that would naturally result in increased hardware sales, so miss me with this "racist" bullshit. 

 

Not much of an audience.

 

It took Gal Gun: Double Peace over a year to reach 100, 000 sales worldwide, and it's the best selling game in the franchise. The Last of Us Part II nearly doubled that number in Japan in its first week. 

 

The proof is in the sales figures. Microsoft would have better luck moving consoles in Japan with games like TLOU2 than Gal Gun. ? 

[Komrade_Dusty]

I have to admit I'm a bit surprised Microsoft is the follower on this kind of stuff. Given how progressive Nadella has been on societal issues it seems like Microsoft would have been the one raising standards on games they publish first. Given Sony's stated goal is to not publish content sexualizing underaged individuals I applaud the stance they take. At a certain point an organization needs to have some level of standards about its place in society. I'm glad to see it spreading.

[diskdocx]

4 hours ago, Darling Baphomet said:

 

I think the difference is that in games like the Witcher 3 - even when you're hiring a prostitute - the people nude have dignity. More importantly, they consent. The Japanese games being "censored", on the other hand, have this Madonna-whore complex - they want to sexualize their characters, but at the same time, fetishize their innocence. They cannot have a character consent to sexual scenes, because that would compromise their innocence. So instead you have games with the classic 'male MC falls onto a woman, squeezes titty' trope, or... groping women dressed as schoolgirls in their sleep, etc. 

 

It's amazing that people in this thread have to come up with bizarre conspiracies like, "Sony forced one of their rivals to not publish a game which would potentially be catastrophic PR" as opposed to considering that... maybe Microsoft just doesn't want to be involved with games whose target audience is people who want to grope sleeping schoolgirls.

 

These games are being "censored" for the same reason that child porn is. Y'all know there's a word for sex without consent, right?

 

Edited January 1, 2021 by diskdocx

[Stardroid]

12 minutes ago, SnowxSakura said:

I find it so weird that when it comes to violence in video games, people nonstop argue against it claiming that it's not reality and people can easily make a judgement between reality and fiction. However if there's erotic content in it, now it's suddenly no longer distinguishable between reality and fiction, hypocrites really.

Maybe you should stretch your imagination a little bit to find the obvious answers. 

 

I do not think people have any issue with keeping reality and fiction separate. However, when we are talking about film and real time actors, you're obviously not going to exploit children as actors to perform and dress lewdly to please a certain audience. That would be wrong because you are exploiting children. This bleeds directly into reality, so there is no longer a distinction.

 

Now, fortunately for pedophiles, they still have anime where this is a much grayer area. Because they are drawings. However, there are different nuances to this too. Violence as a depiction has some sort of entertainment factor. Showing borderline pedophile content, that doesn't quite charm me. It obviously charms some among you. But Sony and or Microsoft are in their full right to say that this depiction of filth is not something they want and it would not be hypocritical in the slightest to allow other "taboo" things such as violence, gore, you name it. You can pull a line somewhere as a company. Seems that depicting children in panties is a fine line to draw. 

Edited January 1, 2021 by Stardroid

[Abby_TheLastofUs]

This calls for another sex strike.

 

 

[Raidou Kuzunoha XIV]

I've never been a fan of censorship of any kind, but at the end of the day, a company publishing a game has every right to decide what gets to be and not be on their platforms.

 

I can't really blame Sony or Microsoft for wanting to protect. When you have games like Omega Labyrinth Z being refused classification in Australia and the UK, ultimately never coming west at all, and getting attention on big news sites like the BBC... I can understand why companies don't really want to have anything to do with a similar game, one that has sexualised depictions of underage girls.

 

Nothing wrong with being pissed over these decisions, but don't expect your being mad to do anything about it. No one owes you this game, and at the end of the day, it's available for other platforms.

 

Plenty of things in Japanese games get changed or censored all the time, but I find it funny how people only ever seem to kick up dirt when it involves censoring the tiddies and panties. I remember when Wrecking Working Designs back in the day artificially made games harder or more annoying than their original release to try and deter people from renting them, and get them to actually buy them. Not to mention all the pop culture references they threw into games that obviously never existed in the original Japanese dialogue. Not to mention all the piss poor translations back in the day, which thankfully are becoming less and less of an issue, though there are still a few exceptions (Ys 8 when it first came out, and some more recent VNs). Maybe it's just me, but that kinda thing pisses me off a lot more than anime girls having slightly less cleavage when a game is brought west.

 

Don't give two hoots about a game like Gal Gun anyway, so I know my opinion is probably biased, but so are a lot of people's in this thread it seems.

[madbuk]

3 hours ago, Undead Wolf said:

These games have an audience. If Microsoft could have offered something that Sony no longer does, that would naturally result in increased hardware sales, so miss me with this "racist" bullshit. And FYI, "pornographic" games were never allowed on PlayStation/Xbox. In a lot of ways, games like Gal*Gun are far more tame compared to the stuff coming out in the western AAA space. There's no nudity or sex scenes for starters. There are Japanese games from a wide variety of genres that include fanservice of some kind, so it's not just stuff like Gal*Gun that's getting affected with the censorship (VN's, JRPG's, etc). This is about Japanese developers having western values forced upon them. It turns out that the Japanese don't appreciate that, who would have guessed?

idk man, the people like you who are upset at their child porn being rightfully taken away from them are the actual ones spouting nonsense in here, as far as I can tell.

Edited January 1, 2021 by Beyondthegrave07

[Beliar4]

Stone from a heart, i though i need to buy an Xbox lol. Im gonna buy it on Steam.

Edited January 1, 2021 by Beliar4
Typo

[SnowxSakura]

25 minutes ago, Stardroid said:

Maybe you should stretch your imagination a little bit to find the obvious answers. 

 

I do not think people have any issue with keeping reality and fiction separate. However, when we are talking about film and real time actors, you're obviously not going to exploit children as actors to perform and dress lewdly to please a certain audience. That would be wrong because you are exploiting children. This bleeds directly into reality, so there is no longer a distinction.

 

Now, fortunately for pedophiles, they still have anime where this is a much grayer area. Because they are drawings. However, there are different nuances to this too. Violence as a depiction has some sort of entertainment factor. Showing borderline pedophile content, that doesn't quite charm me. It obviously charms some among you. But Sony and or Microsoft are in their full right to say that this depiction of filth is not something they want and it would not be hypocritical in the slightest to allow other "taboo" things such as violence, gore, you name it. You can pull a line somewhere as a company. Seems that depicting children in panties is a fine line to draw. 

Sorry but I don't see the difference, should we censor all violent video games because murderers and serial killers play those? Yes, Microsoft and Sony are definitely within their right of deciding what's allowed on their platforms, and consumers are also within their rights to not purchase from them either

[Stardroid]

Just now, SnowxSakura said:

Sorry but I don't see the difference, should we censor all violent video games because murderers and serial killers play those? Yes, Microsoft and Sony are definitely within their right of deciding what's allowed on their platforms, and consumers are also within their rights to not purchase from them either

We have reached a consensus then. If a company deems something too immoral to publish they don't and you can decide to not support that company. For me, violence is definitely not the same as a depiction of a child in a way to please the sexual desires of adult people. 

[Beliar4]

Stardroid what about killing kids? MGSV should be censored?

[thefourfoldroot]

13 hours ago, LoveInHell said:

Understood. I wonder why they can’t just release two versions? Censored and uncensored. Uncensored with a warning sign etc. Then everyone can be happy and its fair and square.

 

It would be easy to make the uncensored Gal Gun only purchasable for 18+ but a lot of people made/make a PS account lying about their age, lol. 

Because the platform holders, first Sony and now MS, have decided the activists would cause too much of a stink online if they allowed these types of games. It really is that simple. Ninty are the only company that still give priority to the Japanese market’s tastes.

[SnowxSakura]

For those thinking that western developers have taken the moral high ground and not depicting sexual situations of minors, let's not forget about The Guy Game on the PS2 that depicted an actual minor topless. But hey, you do you

[mcnichoj]

53 minutes ago, Undead Wolf said:

These games have an audience. If Microsoft could have offered something that Sony no longer does, that would naturally result in increased hardware sales, so miss me with this "racist" bullshit. And FYI, "pornographic" games were never allowed on PlayStation/Xbox. In a lot of ways, games like Gal*Gun are far more tame compared to the stuff coming out in the western AAA space. There's no nudity or sex scenes for starters. There are Japanese games from a wide variety of genres that include fanservice of some kind, so it's not just stuff like Gal*Gun that's getting affected with the censorship (VN's, JRPG's, etc). This is about Japanese developers having western values forced upon them. It turns out that the Japanese don't appreciate that, who would have guessed?

Way to take one small part of the post and get super offended without acknowledging all the factual sales statistics stuff.

Obviously I was being hyperbolic about calling the games phonographic, they are extremely erotic though. GG itself has the "safe mode" button in case someone walks into the room. The game is very self aware and parodies itself.

Again I have to point this out, the top selling 360 Japanese games in Japan were the JRPGs. The super main stream and non-erotic focused games like Blue Dragon, Lost Odyssey, Tales of Vesperia, Last Remnant and Star Ocean 4 were the games that got 100,000 to 200,000 sales. Just because a game is uncensored and on a system doesn't mean it will automatically do better. No More Heroes: Heroes Paradise in an uncensored form only exists on the Xbox 360 in Japan and I'd be surprised if it moved more than 5,000 units (with most of what did sell probably being from westerners like me that imported a copy to play on an imported Xbox 360).

Another fun fact, it's not even the westerners that go and censor all the Japanese games, they do it to themselves most of the time. The Resident Evil games get censored in Japan for gratuitous violence with RE7 most recently getting two releases over there; censored and an uncensored called "Grotesque Ver". Console ported VNs almost always get censored as far back as the PS2 with having no intention of even bringing them to the west.

[Rick_Sanchez]

54 minutes ago, SnowxSakura said:

I find it so weird that when it comes to violence in video games, people nonstop argue against it claiming that it's not reality and people can easily make a judgement between reality and fiction. However if there's erotic content in it, now it's suddenly no longer distinguishable between reality and fiction, hypocrites really.

not to mention there's a study that found no link between violence in video games and real life violence

https://comicbook.com/gaming/news/gta-10-year-study-no-link-between-video-games-violence/?fbclid=IwAR0oC-7eqzpXDfW40ROMk5_RTKzLzBCtAohvrxMNDRvEqHYBiTRd6sZih4A

[SnowxSakura]

17 minutes ago, Stardroid said:

We have reached a consensus then. If a company deems something too immoral to publish they don't and you can decide to not support that company. For me, violence is definitely not the same as a depiction of a child in a way to please the sexual desires of adult people. 

Considering that serial killers get off sexually to killing people, I'd say it is just as bad

[punkshepherd]

Basically we, the consumers, should be free to purchase what we want.

 

But wait! 

 

What about the man selling it to me in the game shop? Is he actually checking my ID to see if im 18? Does responsibility fall on him? 

 

What about Sony saying we dont want this filth on our platform?

 

What about the parents letting their teen boys buy this willynilly (ooh bad choice of words!) on the PSN store using their credit card?

 

What about the country youre actually in, where the age of consent is considerably lower than that guys country?

 

Or what about the millions of broken lives due to violence and barely any violence gets censored? Should we not prioritise the bigger issue?

---

 

Y'know these arent arguments of mine. I'm just bringing up some bits to throw into the delicious pain of this melting pot of a thread. Its very entertaining.

 

Personally if these games stops Pedos from Pedoing then im all for them. If they cause more Pedos in the real world then obviously stop the games.

However there is no way to tell. 

 

Just remember the only difference between martyrdom and suicide is media coverage. 

 

*Censored*

 

 

Edited January 1, 2021 by punkshepherd
Sony censored my post

[Stardroid]

1 minute ago, SnowxSakura said:

Considering that serial killers get off sexually to killing people, I'd say it is just as bad

Yes mate and some people get off sexually by putting Selene Gomez her used sock on their foreheads. The depiction of serial killers as violence and having a sexual oomph out of it is not there to satisfy an audience. I don't know, maybe there are people out there who get aroused from serial killers getting aroused by killing people. Quite meta indeed. Time to stop twisting and turning, trying to be apologetic on something that shouldn't even be a discussion. 

 

The fetishization of children in video games, where you remove clothing parts from them is depravity. We all know the people who defend and buy these games enjoy it. And this is obviously for Sony (and personally for me) crossing the line. Things like violence (not just serial killers, there are multiple layers to violence) does not necessarily pander to people getting a satisfaction from the violence itself. 

 

When I played a God of War game in the day, I liked it because of the action, the story, the gameplay. And there was something in me also enjoying the violence. But most certainly never to the extent of the sexual. You see, most games have multiple layers to them as a selling point. This game, Gal Gun has really only one. People aren't going to tell me they buy these games for the excellent gameplay and story. 

[Beliar4]

Guys stop having fun playing video games. You can only enjoy the story and be in admiration of the new tech graphics.

Just now, Beliar4 said:

.Edit. Sorry you can have a nice trophy at the end too.

 

Edited January 1, 2021 by Beliar4

[thefourfoldroot]

32 minutes ago, Stardroid said:

We have reached a consensus then. If a company deems something too immoral to publish they don't and you can decide to not support that company. For me, violence is definitely not the same as a depiction of a child in a way to please the sexual desires of adult people. 

Wow! Quite a straw man you’ve built for yourself there. What is it, around 40ft? My neck hurts!

For the record, Neither Sony nor MS have, do, or will ever depict children in a sexualised manner. There are laws against that. Are you claiming that Nintendo release pedo material? Seriously? The likes of this or omega labyrinth etc?

[Stardroid]

Just now, thefourfoldroot said:

Wow! Quite a straw man you’ve built for yourself there. What is it, around 40ft? My neck hurts!

For the record, Neither Sony nor MS have, do, or will ever depict children in a sexualised manner. There are laws against that. Are you claiming that Nintendo release pedo material? Seriously? The likes of this or omega labyrinth etc?

I don't think you understand what a strawman argument is. Or you've quoted the wrong person. I think you should actually reread what I am saying. You will most certainly be in agreement with me. 

[SnowxSakura]

10 minutes ago, Stardroid said:

Yes mate and some people get off sexually by putting Selene Gomez her used sock on their foreheads. The depiction of serial killers as violence and having a sexual oomph out of it is not there to satisfy an audience. I don't know, maybe there are people out there who get aroused from serial killers getting aroused by killing people. Quite meta indeed. Time to stop twisting and turning, trying to be apologetic on something that shouldn't even be a discussion. 

 

The fetishization of children in video games, where you remove clothing parts from them is depravity. We all know the people who defend and buy these games enjoy it. And this is obviously for Sony (and personally for me) crossing the line. Things like violence (not just serial killers, there are multiple layers to violence) does not necessarily pander to people getting a satisfaction from the violence itself. 

 

When I played a God of War game in the day, I liked it because of the action, the story, the gameplay. And there was something in me also enjoying the violence. But most certainly never to the extent of the sexual. You see, most games have multiple layers to them as a selling point. This game, Gal Gun has really only one. People aren't going to tell me they buy these games for the excellent gameplay and story. 

Wow, it's almost like you're saying people that aren't mentally ill(like pedos and killers)plays games for the enjoyment of them without having to get sexually excited over them. You're so damn close, a true self aware wolf. Also yes, a lot of those "ecchi" games actually do have really great gameplay, and sometimes a good story. Onechanbara and Senran Kagura are good examples of that

[thefourfoldroot]

Just now, Stardroid said:

I don't think you understand what a strawman argument is. Or you've quoted the wrong person. I think you should actually reread what I am saying. You will most certainly be in agreement with me. 

You were saying it’s ok to stop the release of this finished game, and by extension any other similar game, because this “depicts children in a sexualised manner”.
 

we would all indeed certainly agree with that.

 

As it most certainly does not depict CHILDREN in a sexualised manner, and nor do the other games Sony have censored or banned, then yes, it is an argument that doesn’t address the point honestly or contend with the actual debate. It’s irrelevant.

[Stardroid]

Just now, thefourfoldroot said:

You were saying it’s ok to stop the release of this finished game, and by extension any other similar game, because this “depicts children in a sexualised manner”.
 

we would all indeed certainly agree with that.

 

As it most certainly does not depict CHILDREN in a sexualised manner, and nor do the other games Sony have censored or banned, then yes, it is an argument that doesn’t address the point honestly or contend with the actual debate. It’s irrelevant.

Literally touching a kid in the private parts as she moans

 

[Stardroid]

3 minutes ago, thefourfoldroot said:

You were saying it’s ok to stop the release of this finished game, and by extension any other similar game, because this “depicts children in a sexualised manner”.
 

we would all indeed certainly agree with that.

 

As it most certainly does not depict CHILDREN in a sexualised manner, and nor do the other games Sony have censored or banned, then yes, it is an argument that doesn’t address the point honestly or contend with the actual debate. It’s irrelevant.

 

???????????????????????????????????

7 minutes ago, SnowxSakura said:

Wow, it's almost like you're saying people that aren't mentally ill(like pedos and killers)plays games for the enjoyment of them without having to get sexually excited over them. You're so damn close, a true self aware wolf. Also yes, a lot of those "ecchi" games actually do have really great gameplay, and sometimes a good story. Onechanbara and Senran Kagura are good examples of that

 

Except, that isn't what I am saying. I am saying that this game in particular has only one reason to exist and it's to cater to the depravity of some people by portraying immoral sceneries. And I am saying that the people that buy and play these games almost certainly don't play it for the gameplay or story. Now that is a strawman