Quantcast
Sony to crack down on sexually explicit games |Update: Specifically Japanese games containing underage characters

Forums - Sony Discussion - Sony to crack down on sexually explicit games |Update: Specifically Japanese games containing underage characters

SpokenTruth said:
LivingMetal said:
This has never been a problem so it should not be a problem now.

Slavery wasn't a problem before so it shouldn't not be a problem now.  Right?

Or should we not mature as a society?

Are you saying slavery was never a problem?  Are you saying character depicted in ways that do not favor your personal criteria is slavery?  I express my maturity by giving people freedom of choice, me being tolerant of that choice, and me working on common grounds while agreeing to disagree to work to a general greater resolution.  I don't get self-righteous in the name of "maturity."



Around the Network
ClassicGamingWizzz said:
Ka-pi96 said:

100% agree.

At least if it's a private company you have the option of just going to a different company instead (and hoping the shitty pro-censorship company goes bankrupt). Government censorship though.... just remember that the nazis and north korea were/are big fans of government censorship and that's about all that needs to be said!

Your post is beyond crazy , you are comparing nazi censorship to oposition to Sony not wanting garbage underage shit content on their platforms. You the Ones that want to censor Sony , demanding them to put this type  of content on their consoles... You all  free to buy a Xbox, switch or go to Steam to see your porn teenager japanese school games... 

I dunno, I'd say what's crazy is not actually reading posts (and the things they were quoting) and instead just flying into a blind rage and throwing insults at people.



Bet Shiken that COD would outsell Battlefield in 2018. http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8749702

Heh. I'll just point to DoA3 extreme crimson then.
The original DoA3 extreame realese had MORE content then crimson on PS4 because of sony's censorship. Meanwhile Switch ver is uncensored.

The problem is with the amount of influence Sony has (and the fact that outside of actual H stuff or erogues PC gaming isn't much of a market in Japan) it's basically them BULLYING the smaller devs. Thank f-in God the switch exists, or we could have had a mass Exodus to mobile for these devs.
These devs had made thier home on the psp and vita for a decade, and account for a pretty large part of sony's success in Japan in the handheld space for the past decade, only for Sony to spit in thier face with this move ...

And with underage girls? First of all what is considered 'underage' is different throughout the world anyway. As long as no actual girls get involved there is no issue, lots of countries have minimum AoC at 14-16 anyway. And America's first experience age is lower than its AoC lol.



SpokenTruth said:
Azuren said:

Are you seriously conflating slavery with risque images of make believe women?

No, I'm saying societal norms, customs and acceptability change over time.  LivingMetal claimed this wasn't an issue in the past and therefore should not be an issue now.  And I pointed out how that kind of reasoning is faulty.   Did you even read his post?

Did YOU read my post?  This type of reasoning is NOT faulty when applied to something that is NOT faulty to begin with, creative freedom and consumer choice.  And WHO are you to apply you're preferences of the acceptance of certain societal norms and customs on everyone else?  That's FAULTY.

Last edited by LivingMetal - on 19 April 2019

HoangNhatAnh said:
Hiku said:

If it's games that feature things like groping underage-appearing girls, then that's a good thing.
Based on what they said here, I don't think this is suggesting an extension of what they're already doing primarily in Japanese niche games, but an affirmation on their stance.

If they haven't talked about it publicly before, and considering the content of the article, that seems probable.
They didn't elaborate on their stance on not wanting cross platform gaming either until some months later.

Ah, Hiku, i just remember about DMC5, here is what people on Resetera and Neogaf thought: "Devil May Cry 5 wasn't hentai though and that had its nudity censored for a scene that was acceptable on every other platform. It was so embarrassing that Sony had to go back and remove the censorship after people complained. Is that going to be the standard going forward with every game that has the mildest of nudity?
What's even worse is their hypocritical double standards against Japanese developers. They never dare to censor big western games (they were totally fine with the strippers in Metro Exodus to have their full breasts out in suggestive poses) yet all hell breaked loose when a Japanese developer like Capcom dared to show a naked butt in a scene that had nothing to do with sex."

I have no interest in the opinions of those who pretend they know for sure who was behind this. They're not rational thinkers, but emotional thinkers.
Especially when they chose the imo least likely scenario.

I said "wait and see if a patch would address this", because if this was an internal miscommunication between Capcom's different divisions, that's what would happen.

Because usually the outcome that involves the least amount of coincidences tends to be the correct one.
And I find it a bit hard to believe that Sony went to Capcom to ask them to censor a butt, and Capcom were like, "oh, what a coincidence, we were already planning on censoring one butt. Sure Sony, we'll censor one more butt for you."

If anything, Capcom would have then probably censored both on all platforms to avoid parity issues.
This continues to look like it may very well be a mistake.

HoangNhatAnh said:
Otter said:

Did anyone get to the bottom of that or are we just assuming its Sony? Other platforms were also censored in equally weird places. I mean butts are allowed in PG-13, I struggle to see how this would be out of sony's guidelines. And as you mentioned, they have no issue with Exodus. And as for the removing of the censorship, that only appilied to NA version, Europe is still censored. Anyway thats one of the weirder cases which leads me to believe that its Capcom trying their best to gauge the political landscape in each region and doing an aweful job at it.

Let say: Xbox 1/PC/PS4 censored A because of rating board reasons.

However, only PS4 censored B (Trish and the lens flare scene).

If Trish wasn't related to rating board issues, the patch should have already been implemented in Europe as well.

Some times patches for the same game on different systems differ due to mistakes.

Last edited by Hiku - on 19 April 2019

Around the Network
SpokenTruth said:
Azuren said:

Are you seriously conflating slavery with risque images of make believe women?

No, I'm saying societal norms, customs and acceptability change over time.  LivingMetal claimed this wasn't an issue in the past and therefore should not be an issue now.  And I pointed out how that kind of reasoning is faulty.   Did you even read his post?

I saw you imply slavery is similar, and then try to backpedal your claim.

Slavery isn't your cudgel to use to take the moral high ground. Find a different thing to compare stuff to.



Watch me stream games and hunt trophies on my Twitch channel!

Check out my Twitch Channel!:

www.twitch.tv/AzurenGames

Otter said:
o_O.Q said:

" Idealised =/=Sexualised."

in the context of physical makeup, they are the exact same thing

"sexualisation is not being cut out of games."

it is and honestly i wouldn't have a problem with that if the reason was logical and consistent

"His whole outfit is also functional, whereas the latter is literally about sexualisation."

men and women in terms of their dress often typically display this difference,  in that men generally dress more practically whereas women dress to emphasize their sexual appeal more

this is why makeup, heels, low cut dresses etc etc etc exist but of course its not politically correct to point out these differences in how men and women present themselves

this is why its pretty idiotic for sjws to claim "WOMEN NEED TO BE DEPICTED THE SAME AS MEN IN GAMES OR ELSE BOYS WILL BE SOCIALISED TO THINK WOMEN ARE SEXUAL OBJECTS"... the obvious rebuttal is what are you going to do about the way real women present themselves? if this argument is actually valid (which its obviously not) why wouldn't the kim kardassians and ava roses of the world do the same?

"Emphasis on crotch shots... Military outfits centred on sideboobs lol...Compelely random outfits there to sell the anatomy"

its almost as bad as if they were shirtless

"If Ryu & the other male charcters were sexualised the same"

men and women are not the same and are attracted to different things

"more varied body types and not just steroid bodies"

i don't think you are going to find many people who find fat/short men more attractive than muscular/tall men

"Random nudity creeping into male outfits where it doesn't belong & outfits existing just to tease"

being shirtless is not nudity? how far would we need to go to put men on the same level as women wearing at the very least dancing outfits?

"in the context of physical makeup, they are the exact same thing" Lol, no they're not. Straight men do not sexualise other straight men, so they're idealised version is not necessarily based on sexualisation. When Gearbox decided it wanted its characters to be grizzly boxes of meat in the early Gears entry, I promise you no one was sexualising those characters and they were not created to be sexualised. And often sexes misinterpret the desires of the opposite sex. What woman might idealise may not align with mens desires i.e tons of makeup

And yes, men and woman typically depict themselves different and its ok for games to reflect this, i.e the female characters wearing makeup, dresses etc. But if you can't acknowledge the extreme of this presented in SF5 then I don't think its even worth having a convo with you tbh. What you're inherently saying is that its ok ultra sexualise the female characters (as in SF) because they do it to themselves in real life; the simple answer to this question is: 

How would a predominantly female team design their rooster of female characters?


And by "more varied body types" I mean athletic body types, but maybe all you see is "tall" and "muscular" bodies, which just reinforces my point about the straight male gaze which is why you think the presentation of Ryu and Cammy are equivalents.

"Being shirtless is not nudity?". Again you show you lack understanding of sexualisation, Ryu shirtless because he's in his karate gear is not the same as him wearing an open blazer with a trouser line dangerously close to his pelvis or randomly exposing his abs in an outfit where it doesn't make sense, i.e its purely there to titulate. Every one of these images is more sexualised in spite of them expressing less or equivalent levels of skin than a random shirtless male in karate gear.

 

"Lol, no they're not. Straight men do not sexualise other straight men"

given the research i've done recently on the incel movement and their obsession with who a chad is and who a beta is and jaw size, height, bla bla bla... i have to tell you that you are completely wrong

that's obviously an outlier, but even normal men are able to understand intuitively what is attractive and what is not attractive

no one has trouble telling who is more attractive here

"When Gearbox decided it wanted its characters to be grizzly boxes of meat in the early Gears entry, I promise you no one was sexualising those characters and they were not created to be sexualised."

well yes... because developers do not always have attractiveness as their motivation when designing characters... i mean is that your argument here?

"And often sexes misinterpret the desires of the opposite sex. What woman might idealise may not align with mens desires i.e tons of makeup"

i disagree with this i think its fairly common knowledge among men that women on average prefer handsome, tall, fit men and men prefer pretty, slender women with prominent secondary sexual characteristics 

we wouldn't have all of the feminist rage targeted at ads like this one otherwise

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/27/beach-body-ready-america-weight-loss-ad-instagram

and here's something else to demonstrate that what you are saying cannot be true - how then do you know that sexualisation has occurred? well obviously you have to have some standard you are applying right? as the feminists above do

"And yes, men and woman typically depict themselves different"

its not just that, you forgot the part where i made it clear that women often dress to emphasize their sexuality and what the feminists do not understand is that this then leeches into how women are portrayed in various media

if feminists want this to stop happening then ironically they have to start putting pressure on women to stop emphasizing their sexuality ironically as the muslims do, i have already given you an example of this happening with that beach body ad and there are many many many other examples such as the banning of grid girls

i don't think these people have the level of self awareness to understand why they are doing these things but i can tell you that on a subconscious level they understand what i'm telling you

i've said for a long time now that feminism has reach the point where it'll become toxic to women and start peeling back their rights and i've been called a madman for that... well, buckle in your seat belts and watch what is going to keep happening

"But if you can't acknowledge the extreme of this presented in SF5"

you mean cammy's legs? why are cammy's legs a problem for you?

"What you're inherently saying is that its ok ultra sexualise the female characters (as in SF) because they do it to themselves in real life"

my argument wasn't about whether its ok or not... since they are a private company and thankfully at this time can tell feminists to go jump off a cliff when they design whatever characters they want

my argument was that if its supposedly so harmful to have female characters depicted in ways that are fairly common out in the real world then its fairly pointless to oppose the character designs since as was said... we see this in the real world fairly often

"How would a predominantly female team design their rooster of female characters?"

i don't care, i'm not a sexist so it doesn't matter to me what sex a designer is

"maybe all you see is "tall" and "muscular" bodies, which just reinforces my point about the straight male gaze which is why you think the presentation of Ryu and Cammy are equivalents."

huh? are you denying that tall and muscular are perceived generally as being more attractive by women?

with regards to ryu and cammy, cammy has her legs exposed and ryu has his entire upper body exposed can you explain logically for me how ryu having more of his body exposed can be less sexual? is your argument here that female legs are more potent than the entire upper body of a man?

"Again you show you lack understanding of sexualisation"

probably because the word actually means nothing, but i'm humoring you by referring to it in the way i understand feminists to use it

to elaborate if i took a naked women and i displayed her to a gay man, obviously there is no sexual attraction, but if i do the same for a heterosexual man then the opposite is true... why?... because the human body is just as object, it is not inherently "sexualised"... what if i did the above for a blind man? you see what's happening here right?

its a stupid term feminists came up with to demonise men just like objectification

"Being shirtless is not nudity?". Again you show you lack understanding of sexualisation, Ryu shirtless because he's in his karate gear is not the same as him wearing an open blazer with a trouser line dangerously close to his pelvis or randomly exposing his abs in an outfit where it doesn't make sense, i.e its purely there to titulate."

you seem to be arguing here that sexuality is about intent, that ryu can only be percieved as being sexual if he intends on being sexual and obviously if you scrutinise that argument a bit you'd realise its a silly argument

you wouldn't have women complaining endlessly about the unwanted attention they garner from men if that was the case



Good grief. I moved out of home so I wouldn't have to deal with this shit. Now Sony have decided have to parent me. The tyranny of people 'who only want what's best for you'.



Hiku said:
HoangNhatAnh said:

Ah, Hiku, i just remember about DMC5, here is what people on Resetera and Neogaf thought: "Devil May Cry 5 wasn't hentai though and that had its nudity censored for a scene that was acceptable on every other platform. It was so embarrassing that Sony had to go back and remove the censorship after people complained. Is that going to be the standard going forward with every game that has the mildest of nudity?
What's even worse is their hypocritical double standards against Japanese developers. They never dare to censor big western games (they were totally fine with the strippers in Metro Exodus to have their full breasts out in suggestive poses) yet all hell breaked loose when a Japanese developer like Capcom dared to show a naked butt in a scene that had nothing to do with sex."

I have no interest in the opinions of those who pretend they know for sure who was behind this. They're not rational thinkers, but emotional thinkers.
Especially when they chose the imo least likely scenario.

I said "wait and see if a patch would address this", because if this was an internal miscommunication between Capcom's different divisions, that's what would happen.

Because usually the outcome that involves the least amount of coincidences tends to be the correct one.
And I find it a bit hard to believe that Sony went to Capcom to ask them to censor a butt, and Capcom were like, "oh, what a coincidence, we were already planning on censoring one butt. Sure Sony, we'll censor one more butt for you."

If anything, Capcom would have then probably censored both on all platforms to avoid parity issues.
This continues to look like it may very well be a mistake.

HoangNhatAnh said:

Let say: Xbox 1/PC/PS4 censored A because of rating board reasons.

However, only PS4 censored B (Trish and the lens flare scene).

If Trish wasn't related to rating board issues, the patch should have already been implemented in Europe as well.

Some times patches for the same game on different systems differ due to mistakes.

A "mistake" that only on Western ver (AU/EU) of PS4 is somehow ridiculous 



twintail said:
shikamaru317 said:

You do realize that games that feature no underage characters have already been affected by this policy change, right? Dead or Alive Xtreme 3 has no underage girls for instance, and the latest PS4 version of that game is censored in Japan compared to the Switch version. 

These are digital characters so actual age is irrelevant. Marie Rose might be 18 according to Tecmo but I think its easily arguable that she looks younger. The stuff taken out is basically creep territory. If you have an issue with not being able to get an upskirt glimpse then sure it is annoying.

I could show you pictures of adult women with a similar body type to Marie Rose. Alicia Vikander for one, and she is 30. Petite does not equal young.