Quantcast
PQube cancels Omega Labyrinth Z western release on PS due to disagreement with Sony over sexual content

Forums - Gaming Discussion - PQube cancels Omega Labyrinth Z western release on PS due to disagreement with Sony over sexual content

Barkley said:
Nem said:

No, that is not a child. It's a drawing.

 

Also, there's no fondling. There's moving the analog sticks.

 

See, i have trouble with this. People not being able to differentiate reality from games and then saying one is ok depicting murder but the other one isn't for depicting suggestion. It's completely arbitrary.

It's a drawing of a child. That's why it's called a "depiction" because it's not real, doesn't mean it's ok.

The difference between violence and sex is that sex on screen and in real life illicits the same response, arousal. Violence on the screen and violence in real life does not illicit the same response.

Don't defend the sexual depiction of a child in a game designed to sexually arouse the player. It doesn't matter if it's a drawing or not, the game is saying "hey look it's a child, get off on this."

I'm not defending no option. I'm saying it makes no sense to consider one something and the other something else. It's hypocrisy.  Both need to be censored in my opinion or none.

Also, why doesn't violence illicit the same response? We all know school shootings are a common occurrence. Have you never practiced Street fighter or Mortal Kombat moves as a child? How is it different?

 

Screw this though. I am not gonna be accused of defending something i'm not for pointing out the hypocrisy.

Last edited by Nem - on 26 June 2018

Around the Network
Nem said:

Also, why doesn't violence illicit the same response? We all know school shootings are a common occurrence. Have you never practiced Street fighter moves as a child? How is it different?

I'm not saying that violence in video games has no effect on the person playing, there's many studies and debates about that and people come to different conclusions, that's another discussion. But what I'm talking about is general responses to the content.

If you see something sexual on screen the general response for most people is Arousal, be it Movie, Game or Book. The response in real life to a sexual situation is also Arousal.

The response to violence in a Movie, Game or Book varies based on the person but for most they're just having fun, whereas if they are in a violent situation in real life there response is not "I'm having fun", the general response to violence is terror. This is the difference.

Sex on Screen - Aroused
Sex IRL - Aroused

Violence on screen - Fun
Violence IRL - Terror

It's instinctive that we're in danger in a real violent situation, whereas when it comes to sexual situations there is no danger (at least for the instigator) so the reaction to onscreen and real is the same with sex, but not with violence.

Nem said: 

Screw this though. I am not gonna be accused of defending something i'm not for pointing out the hypocrisy.

I apologise for taking your words the wrong way, I assumed you were saying both were ok, rather than saying both were wrong.



Predictions (Made July 2019)

LTD: PS4 - 130m, Switch - 110m, XBO - 52m       2019 : PS4 - 15m, Switch - 18.8m, XBO - 4.8m        2020: Switch - 22m (Peak Year)


Barkley said:
Nem said:

Also, why doesn't violence illicit the same response? We all know school shootings are a common occurrence. Have you never practiced Street fighter moves as a child? How is it different?

I'm not saying that violence in video games has no effect on the person playing, there's many studies and debates about that and people come to different conclusions, that's another discussion. But what I'm talking about is general responses to the content.

If you see something sexual on screen the general response for most people is Arousal, be it Movie, Game or Book. The response in real life to a sexual situation is also Arousal.

The response to violence in a Movie, Game or Book varies based on the person but for most they're just having fun, whereas if they are in a violent situation in real life there response is not "I'm having fun", the general response to violence is terror. This is the difference.

Sex on Screen - Aroused
Sex IRL - Aroused

Violence on screen - Fun
Violence IRL - Terror

It's instinctive that we're in danger in a real violent situation, whereas when it comes to sexual situations there is no danger (at least for the instigator) so the reaction to onscreen and real is the same with sex, but not with violence.

There is no sex on screen on this game. There is suggestion.

Like, i am not defending this game. It probably pushes the envelope. I only watched a trailer and i didn't see anything that shocked me more than say the violence depicted on the last of us 2. So, yeah... i find it a bit odd.

So, what's worse? A game that doesn't depict sex, but suggests it or a game that depicts murder in it's full detailed gore and call's it fun?

It doesn't feel right to me. They both need to be censored in the same way.

Last edited by Nem - on 26 June 2018

Nem said:
Barkley said:

I'm not saying that violence in video games has no effect on the person playing, there's many studies and debates about that and people come to different conclusions, that's another discussion. But what I'm talking about is general responses to the content.

If you see something sexual on screen the general response for most people is Arousal, be it Movie, Game or Book. The response in real life to a sexual situation is also Arousal.

The response to violence in a Movie, Game or Book varies based on the person but for most they're just having fun, whereas if they are in a violent situation in real life there response is not "I'm having fun", the general response to violence is terror. This is the difference.

Sex on Screen - Aroused
Sex IRL - Aroused

Violence on screen - Fun
Violence IRL - Terror

It's instinctive that we're in danger in a real violent situation, whereas when it comes to sexual situations there is no danger (at least for the instigator) so the reaction to onscreen and real is the same with sex, but not with violence.

There is no sex on screen on this game. There is suggestion.

Like, i am not defending this game. It probably pushes the envelope. I only watched a trailer and i didn't see anything that shocked me more than say the violence depicted on the last of us 2. So, yeah... i find it a bit odd.

So, what's worse? A game that doesn't depict sex, but suggests it or a game that depicts murder in it's full detailed gore and call's it fun?

It doesn't feel right to me. They both need to be censored in the same way.

It's really mostly down to the target, violence against children in games is also taboo. I can't think of any games where you can kill children.

Personally I agree with you that both are too much, but I also understand why they are treated the way they are.



Predictions (Made July 2019)

LTD: PS4 - 130m, Switch - 110m, XBO - 52m       2019 : PS4 - 15m, Switch - 18.8m, XBO - 4.8m        2020: Switch - 22m (Peak Year)


More child porn, people actually defending this, wow. Kind of agree with the UK's response to it rather than the weirdos on a forum.



Around the Network

Double post, dodgy website.



Barkley said:

It isn't just Sonys fault you're not getting this game.

The rating boards for the united kingdom, Ireland, Germany, Australia and New Zealand have all banned the game.

The issue isn't just "boobs" so all of the "we can kill people but not allowed cleavage?" Posts in here are meaningless. The issue that is taken with this game is sexualisation of underage characters.

Here's what the rating board in the UK said in there statement for why the game is banned.

"he game is explicit in its setting within a “school” environment and the majority of the characters are young girls – one child is referred to as being a “first year” student and is seen holding a teddy bear. The game clearly promotes the sexualisation of children via the sexual interaction between the game player and the female characters. "

Yeah, if the girls we depicted as being older, than it wouldn't have been banned.



The internet is full of free porn, who needs this kind of convoluted crap anyways? No loss there.



No nipples or pubes no sale, I WILL NOT, I REPEAT I WILL NOT , BE DICK TEASED.





That gameplay though!!