Video Game Censorship: Discussion Thread

[HuntingFever]

I'll just leave this here:

 

 

[DaivRules]

2 hours ago, HuntingFever said:

I'll just leave this here:

 

That video is about 5:30 longer than it should be, but has some great quotes from Nintendo’s stance on censorship. Thanks for sharing!

Edited July 3, 2019 by DaivRules

[AJ_Radio]

On 7/2/2019 at 11:56 AM, BLKChaosDragon said:

Perhaps so, but I hope they never do. My own reason being gambling which falls under AO and seeing the games industry abuse a lite version of that...lootboxes ...gatcha ect..I don't want to see my games become further bastardized than they already have. As for Porn games, PC has you covered if you ever need them, I honestly find no value in them but if others do you know where to go to get them.

 

The Adults Only rating works in the same fashion as the NC-17 rating.

 

This is generally reserved for porn. 

 

However you’re trying to make a point that anything that has gambling should be Adults Only. I’m referring to virtual gambling that you can spend money on. 

 

My take on this is we have these ratings because of the children. Censorship groups that focus on entertainment place children ahead of a violent video game, TV show or movie because exposure to them can warp their sense of thinking. Gambling on the other hand affects all age groups above the age of 18 - 21. That is a whole nother discussion. 

 

I cannot support these censorship groups in any fashion, because their demands often force the gaming companies to mask what should be the final product. 

 

In ways censorship groups have backed off. But we still have idiots, notably Sony trying to censor these Anime/Hentai games that only a select few people care about. 

Edited July 4, 2019 by Spaz

[BLKChaosDragon]

On 7/2/2019 at 8:34 PM, DaivRules said:

Keep it on topic. If you want to make a separate thread in Off Topic about the difference in “gaming” sites, do that. Don’t bring it here and don’t attack each other personally. 

 

Bruh did you just censor me?  Lol, just kidding. I wanted to to the general consensus before I said anything but...maybe its not a discussion worth having, not until things calm down anyway.

 

16 hours ago, Spaz said:

 

The Adults Only rating works in the same fashion as the NC-17 rating.

This is generally reserved for porn.

 

That is true but I'd say Not necessarily it does encompass porn yeah, but also gambling, with money and senseless ultra violence ~ to a degree . Its a rating most developers avoid mostly for capital on consoles.

16 hours ago, Spaz said:

 

However you’re trying to make a point that anything that has gambling should be Adults Only. I’m referring to virtual gambling that you can spend money on. 

 

 

That was probably poor phrasing on my part, I apologize. I simply don't want lootboxes that uses RL money or virtual currency you can buy ass well as other monitization practices in my games, that's all.

 

16 hours ago, Spaz said:

 

I cannot support these censorship groups in any fashion, because their demands often force the gaming companies to mask what should be the final product. 

 

In ways censorship groups have backed off. But we still have idiots, notably Sony trying to censor these Anime/Hentai games that only a select few people care about. 

 

It is their platform however I do wish they were a little more clearer on what they do and don't allow. There are still 3 other alternatives if a dev wishes to be unhindered in that.

[RadiantFlamberge]

On 7/4/2019 at 1:47 PM, BLKChaosDragon said:

That was probably poor phrasing on my part, I apologize. I simply don't want lootboxes that uses RL money or virtual currency you can buy ass well as other monitization practices in my games, that's all.

I agree that lootboxes have to go. This LB situation is worse than that Key Master redemption game, where operators can set the win frequency to be as seldom as they want (default setting is 1 win for every 700 plays. If you see a KM machine... I will warn you right now, just don't bother. Keep away from it!). With EA's FIFA Ultimate Teams for example, I'm sure some of the good players are rigged to be given rarely.

 

Selling virtual currencies for a pay-to-win scheme is not even the least bit cool. It should be so that everyone has to work to earn the good stuff, rather than getting a chance to gain a cheapshot advantage by opening up their wallet.

Edited July 6, 2019 by RadiantFlamberge
typo- changed "an" to "a"

[ShadeSplit]

Let creators/developers release what they want, and let the consumers choose to support them or not. That's the only sensible path here.

[BLKChaosDragon]

12 hours ago, RadiantFlamberge said:

I agree that lootboxes have to go. This LB situation is worse than that Key Master redemption game, where operators can set the win frequency to be as seldom as they want (default setting is 1 win for every 700 plays. If you see a KM machine... I will warn you right now, just don't bother. Keep away from it!). With EA's FIFA Ultimate Teams for example, I'm sure some of the good players are rigged to be given rarely.

 

Selling virtual currencies for a pay-to-win scheme is not even the least bit cool. It should be so that everyone has to work to earn the good stuff, rather than getting a chance to gain an cheapshot advantage by opening up their wallet.

 

I'd give this another like If i could ?

 

5 hours ago, GameOverComesAll said:

Let creators/developers release what they want, and let the consumers choose to support them or not. That's the only sensible path here.

 

I'm not too sure How I should interpret this as it does come across a vague blanket statement. I'm sorry but no, we shouldn't let companies do what they want notably the likes of EA and Activision, KT and others they'll only push their montization methods further at what point do we say that's enough? Should we just let it happen at the cost of our own player experience for a product we paid for, too see our favorite franchise become something...grotesque. Should we just let the "whales" go on by and say nothing?

 

One example i can think of is Dynasty warriors 9 It was a glitchy mess and they took out the weapons that were in all the previous games and sold it back to us. It shouldn't be accepted in any way shape or form Buy back the fun for $50 -KT So yeah customers have a right to know if they're gonna be screwed over.

 

 

 

[ShadeSplit]

35 minutes ago, BLKChaosDragon said:

 

I'd give this another like If i could

 

 

I'm not too sure How I should interpret this as it does come across a vague blanket statement. I'm sorry but no, we shouldn't let companies do what they want notably the likes of EA and Activision, KT and others they'll only push their montization methods further at what point do we say that's enough? Should we just let it happen at the cost of our own player experience for a product we paid for, too see our favorite franchise become something...grotesque. Should we just let the "whales" go on by and say nothing?

 

One example i can think of is Dynasty warriors 9 It was a glitchy mess and they took out the weapons that were in all the previous games and sold it back to us. It shouldn't be accepted in any way shape or form Buy back the fun for $50 -KT So yeah customers have a right to know if they're gonna be screwed over.

 

 

 

 

This should have been obvious, but my comment was purely concerning content regulation. Monetization is a separate issue.

[RadiantFlamberge]

11 hours ago, ShadeSplit said:

Let creators/developers release what they want, and let the consumers choose to support them or not. That's the only sensible path here.

True. If someone does not care for the content in a certain game, they have the right to just ignore it. Nobody is forcing them to buy or even play it. Live & let live.

[NewVegasNick]

I still find it hilarious that the majority of "censorship" discussion on this site is about the amount of fucking titties you see in your games lmao. It's frankly embarassing.

 

Meanwhile, I've seen nobody talk about this recent instance of *actual* bonafide censorship.

 

 

[Undead Wolf]

12 minutes ago, DoucetDudes said:

I still find it hilarious that the majority of "censorship" discussion on this site is about the amount of fucking titties you see in your games lmao. It's frankly embarassing.

 

Meanwhile, I've seen nobody talk about this recent instance of *actual* bonafide censorship.

 

 

 

No shit we talk about Sony's censorship policy over Chinese censorship. This is a western PlayStation forum in case you forgot...  As bad as censorship is in China, it doesn't affect us here in the west, and there's nothing we can do about it either.

 

Newsflash: The Chinese government does a lot of bad shit. That doesn't mean we shouldn't talk about issues just because they're less severe than the stuff they do.

[RadiantFlamberge]

I've heard about Devotion, referring to Xi Jinping as Winnie The Pooh. Also, China banned the movie Christopher Robin because you-know-who appears in it. China has such a lame government straight out of George Orwell's 1984. The hell with China... I don't think developers should bother making games for that market.

 

Now back to our own situation, where we are thankfully free of China's bullshit. Parental controls eliminate the need for censorship... Nintendo's powers that be are proving that they know this. Sony's censormaniacs need to remember it. Just what is the point of censoring an M rated game when it's not for children under 17? Parents, do your job please. Let's hope Sony will not bowdlerize Cyberpunk 2077.

[thefourfoldroot]

My opinion it a that a platform holder should not be allowed to impose censorship on a platform, it is the ratings bodies, and they alone, who should dictate what is not allowed and bear responsibility for released content (and my opinion is that there should be no censorship of artistic expression by ratings bodies unless that art explicitly calls for the harm of others, but that's never going to happen)

[majob]

On 7/6/2019 at 8:32 AM, DoucetDudes said:

I still find it hilarious that the majority of "censorship" discussion on this site is about the amount of fucking titties you see in your games lmao. It's frankly embarassing.

 

Meanwhile, I've seen nobody talk about this recent instance of *actual* bonafide censorship.

 

 

I'd say it's pretty stupid to expect the Chinese government to let someone disrespect them openly while freely conducting business in their country. It doesn't work that way. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

1 hour ago, thefourfoldroot said:

My opinion it a that a platform holder should not be allowed to impose censorship on a platform, it is the ratings bodies, and they alone, who should dictate what is not allowed and bear responsibility for released content (and my opinion is that there should be no censorship of artistic expression by ratings bodies unless that art explicitly calls for the harm of others, but that's never going to happen)

The Playstation is a private platform, not a public one, Sony has the right to dictate content on it as they see fit. The ESRB can't prohibit the release of a game nor can they make cuts in content. It's merely a voluntary guideline system implemented to satisfy retail stores and parents.

[DaivRules]

2 hours ago, thefourfoldroot said:

My opinion it a that a platform holder should not be allowed to impose censorship on a platform, it is the ratings bodies, and they alone, who should dictate what is not allowed and bear responsibility for released content (and my opinion is that there should be no censorship of artistic expression by ratings bodies unless that art explicitly calls for the harm of others, but that's never going to happen)

 

The ratings bodies should only label and rate the content, not dictate what is allowed to be released. Allowing them to dictate what content gets released would change ratings agencies in a way no one would ultimately like. 

 

Edited July 8, 2019 by DaivRules

[DEI2EK]

On 7/6/2019 at 8:32 AM, DoucetDudes said:

I still find it hilarious that the majority of "censorship" discussion on this site is about the amount of fucking titties you see in your games lmao. It's frankly embarassing.

 

Meanwhile, I've seen nobody talk about this recent instance of *actual* bonafide censorship.

 

 

sorry for not talking about chinese censorship on an english speaking forum

[thefourfoldroot]

4 hours ago, majob said:

I'd say it's pretty stupid to expect the Chinese government to let someone disrespect them openly while freely conducting business in their country. It doesn't work that way. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

The Playstation is a private platform, not a public one, Sony has the right to dictate content on it as they see fit. The ESRB can't prohibit the release of a game nor can they make cuts in content. It's merely a voluntary guideline system implemented to satisfy retail stores and parents.

I know it's a private platform, I'm not debating what rights they currently have, but what they should have. Especially when they release games exclusively on their system and/or when they have such market dominance that their mutilated games become the de facto standard. Technically they have the right to block violent films on their blu ray players or rap on their media players but do they try to do those things? Would people accept it? Do we want private companies dictating what we are not allowed to see, or do we all agree that's it's the job of an elected government to set standards?

[VoidVictorious]

It is fairly obvious that we live in a very different world than we did 5-10 years ago. Sony’s argument is that they want to be able to release things globally without cultural reactions to things that may be accepted in one country and forbidden in another. It is a fair argument. Things have gotten difficult. Rating systems to classify games are different in almost every country and the rating assigned to them would therefore be different in every country. As long as these changes do not radically eliminate important aspects to the plot or flow of a game, I don’t care. Keep in mind this is only my opinion. Frankly, the whole “messing with the art of the creator” argument over exposed breasts, etc. is pretty weak in my opinion.

[DaivRules]

1 hour ago, thefourfoldroot said:

do we all agree that's it's the job of an elected government to set standards?

 

We do not all agree. Elected government is the last entity I was setting standards for media content. A couple other points I want to clarify, yes Sony owns a private platform, they are not a private company. Sony a public company. Publicly owned and answering to a Board of Directors. They also exist in a marketplace so competition should fill any gaps Sony fails to fill in a demand for content.

 

Sony is allowed to worry about their brand and the public perception of what their brand is associated with. In the cases brought up as "censorship" in this thread, I think it's knee-jerk and completely overreacting on Sony's part to make these sweeping decisions.

 

As a corollary, Sony does have a movie and music division and they very much moderate the content they allow produced under their brand. Same with Crackle, dictating which content is allowed. Comparing it to hardware is more of a stretch since it's not really an apples to apples comparison. 

Edited July 8, 2019 by DaivRules

[WardenOfWisps]

I dont think games should be censored. I mean just dont buy it? Money talks, so if no one buys it they usually wont keep making it that way. 

[majob]

2 hours ago, thefourfoldroot said:

I know it's a private platform, I'm not debating what rights they currently have, but what they should have. Especially when they release games exclusively on their system and/or when they have such market dominance that their mutilated games become the de facto standard. Technically they have the right to block violent films on their blu ray players or rap on their media players but do they try to do those things? Would people accept it? Do we want private companies dictating what we are not allowed to see, or do we all agree that's it's the job of an elected government to set standards?

Personally I don't even think the government should have the right to dictate what content the public can consume but regardless Sony can do what they want on their platform, whether I agree to it or not. They're not telling me what I can or can't watch or play because I can easily stop association with them and go to someone who won't.

[RadiantFlamberge]

7 hours ago, thefourfoldroot said:

do we all agree that's it's the job of an elected government to set standards?

I don't want the government taking control of that. Not at all.

If anyone does any censoring, it should be limited to the platform holder. While it is Sony's choice, we have the right to hate it. Hopefully GWGB will steer them off this path eventually. If they want to make people go buy PC, Switch, or Xbox One versions of certain games instead of the PS4 ones, then censoring is a wonderful way to do that. Every game bought on another platform for this reason means Sony doesn't get their cut.

[thefourfoldroot]

6 hours ago, majob said:

Personally I don't even think the government should have the right to dictate what content the public can consume but regardless Sony can do what they want on their platform, whether I agree to it or not. They're not telling me what I can or can't watch or play because I can easily stop association with them and go to someone who won't.

Not when they have such market dominance that devs will just ensure they meet Sony standards and just release that version on every platform. They are controlling what is available, not through a democratically agreed upon standard, but their own desires to bend the knee to a very vocal minority.

6 hours ago, DaivRules said:

 

We do not all agree. Elected government is the last entity I was setting standards for media content. A couple other points I want to clarify, yes Sony owns a private platform, they are not a private company. Sony a public company. Publicly owned and answering to a Board of Directors. They also exist in a marketplace so competition should fill any gaps Sony fails to fill in a demand for content.

 

Sony is allowed to worry about their brand and the public perception of what their brand is associated with. In the cases brought up as "censorship" in this thread, I think it's knee-jerk and completely overreacting on Sony's part to make these sweeping decisions.

 

As a corollary, Sony does have a movie and music division and they very much moderate the content they allow produced under their brand. Same with Crackle, dictating which content is allowed. Comparing it to hardware is more of a stretch since it's not really an apples to apples comparison. 

Well I don't agree anything should be censored other than incitement to violence as I said, which is a crime and thus the only ones who should be able to restrict that is the government and courts.

 

Also, my point was they shouldn't be able to control what message society can consume, what is censored and what not, as such their not censoring would not reflect badly on them as it shouldn't even be a question they have the responsibility or right to do so. Thus to not censor would not impact public perception of them. As I said, I was arguing for what "should be", not the disgrace that is.

 

And yes Sony publish movies and music, and I didn't suggest that they don't control what they release. I'm not talking about that, and it's normal. I'm talking about forcing artists to censor what they release by holding ransom the means of distribution.

Edited July 8, 2019 by thefourfoldroot

[thefourfoldroot]

7 hours ago, VoidVictorious said:

It is fairly obvious that we live in a very different world than we did 5-10 years ago. Sony’s argument is that they want to be able to release things globally without cultural reactions to things that may be accepted in one country and forbidden in another. It is a fair argument. Things have gotten difficult. Rating systems to classify games are different in almost every country and the rating assigned to them would therefore be different in every country. As long as these changes do not radically eliminate important aspects to the plot or flow of a game, I don’t care. Keep in mind this is only my opinion. Frankly, the whole “messing with the art of the creator” argument over exposed breasts, etc. is pretty weak in my opinion.

So if things aren't important to you then it doesn't matter...until it is important to you I presume...a principled stand is needed, not varying degrees of being able to stomach something innately disagreeable.

[Gamer-Girl-Noire]

censorship shouldn't happen in games unless the said content is illegal. if it's not leave it alone and let people actually decide for themselves on if they want the game as there's no point trying to please a crowd that most cases have zero interest in the game regardless of if it gets changed or not.