[QUOTE=Sableye;49537011]Games are works of art, covered by the first amendment which has been interpreted to cover art as well as published media, and since the data they used is all publicly available they don't actually need permission from people to use it, so ya you can't actually shut them down because you don't like them
[editline]15th January 2016[/editline]
At the same time if this congresswoman were actually interested in preventing people's identities and such from being bought and sold then she should be doing something to stop apple and Google from already doing that. More and more database breaches will happen as long as people's IDs are a currency, there's no reason for an agency to have 40+ years of personnel records decades after they've died, delete the sensitive stuff and move on[/QUOTE]
Again, please read her letter and see she never asked for the game to be shut down. You're grasping at this point.
[QUOTE=Take_Opal;49537185]Again, please read her letter and see she never asked for the game to be shut down. You're grasping at this point.[/QUOTE]Yeah, after reading the letter it's pretty clear that I misunderstood what was going on and then as I read the thread that just confirmed it.
My mistake: reading reddit
[editline]15th January 2016[/editline]
Though I don't disagree with Sableye's second point.
a government official pressures someone to take down their content and we arn't calling it censorship?
[QUOTE=General J;49536514]There is a sea of examples to make fun of SJW-like behavior so I see no need to try and manufacture some.[/QUOTE]
don't need to.
[media]https://twitter.com/RepKClark/status/621734750198341632[/media]
SJW's confirmed for literally taking peoples games away via government censorship.
This actually looks/looked quite fun. Shame.
[QUOTE=Wii60;49537966]a government official pressures someone to take down their content and we arn't calling it censorship?
don't need to.
SJW's confirmed for literally taking peoples games away via government censorship.[/QUOTE]
Katherine Clark has no judicial or executive authority. She sent a personal letter (with a letterhead and format identifying her as a member of Congress, as are provided by Congress itself to all its members for personal use) to the app's developers because she was concerned that individual users could abuse the app by trading non-consenting Twitter accounts. She made no implication of utilising her power as a member of Congress or doing anything else to censor the game if the developers did nothing.
She threatened nobody and censored nothing, and if she does somehow have more leverage just because she's a "government official" (which she is not, because again, she has no authority) she did not use it malevolently.
i don't really understand how the harassment potential of this is any more than the harassment potential of having a public profile in the first place, but airing concerns isn't really censorship and while congressmen have far greater input in government than most people they still have a right to be personally concerned by something. although i'm not so much a fan of going directly to tim cook for something like this as he is much more likely to take the concerns of someone in government more seriously than your average jane or joe
[editline]15th January 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Arctic-Zone;49538127]She threatened nobody and censored nothing, and if she does somehow have more leverage just because she's a "government official" (which she is not, because again, she has no authority) she did not use it malevolently.[/QUOTE]
she does have more leverage in the same way a celebrity has more leverage: their words hold more clout due to their positions as public figures
I don't think this is censorship
BUT, if you don't think a congresswoman has considerably more authority than your average citizen, you're dead wrong. She has much more power and authority. To deny that is wrong. Just wrong.
[QUOTE=woolio1;49535653]Yeah... That's illegal.
Like, that's "Your political career is over" levels of illegal. You cannot coerce people using your government authority, outside of threatening to pursue legal proceedings if there is a legitimate case to be made.
Someone needs to lawyer up and sue the state.[/QUOTE]
There's nothing illegal. She's a citizen who had a concern and ASKED apple to remove the app. She didn't force them or abuse her power. This is what representatives are supposed to do.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49538285]I don't think this is censorship
BUT, if you don't think a congresswoman has considerably more authority than your average citizen, you're dead wrong. She has much more power and authority. To deny that is wrong. Just wrong.[/QUOTE]
Clark definitely does have more reputation, but she holds no executive office. So, while she may have more command socially (and I do believe that factored into how well the developers listened to her), she couldn't have done anything against them in her capacity as a Congresswoman. Again though, yeah, her position does influence how people respond to her for sure.
We're on the same side here pretty much, I just want to stress to other readers that this was a voluntary response by the people who made Stolen! and in no way constitutes government censorship. It is extremely important to recognize the difference between voluntary self-censorship (which is technically exercising the freedom of expression in that one willingly does [i]not[/i] express something) and institutional censorship (which is where institutions, such as the government, mandate that something not be expressed by others).
[QUOTE=woolio1;49535653]Yeah... That's illegal.
Like, that's "Your political career is over" levels of illegal. You cannot coerce people using your government authority, outside of threatening to pursue legal proceedings if there is a legitimate case to be made.
Someone needs to lawyer up and sue the state.[/QUOTE]
Looked at the letters. Nope, nothing illegal to them, they're actually well constructed.
a) There's no single threat anywhere, not even implied.
b) She's asking them to stop a third party, who may or may not be doing something wrong.
[QUOTE=Xonax;49535624]Honestly, after DOAX3, Valkyrie Drive, the guys who made Neptunia, and so on refusing to localize or release their games in the west due to this stuff is making me concerned for games.
People can't say SJWs can't take our games away anymore, look at this. Katherine Clark just fucking used her power to get a totally legal game to be removed and shut down.[/QUOTE]
Not disagreeing with you on censorship but Dead or Alive Xtreme Volleyball 3 was probably never going to be localized in the first place and the whole "we're not porting this because SJWs" thing was a controversy a some random pr guy stirred up to boost import sales. I really don't think a Japanese developer is going to give a shit if some shitlord bloggers bitch about sexism in videogames.
[QUOTE=DiscoMelon;49538977]Not disagreeing with you on censorship but Dead or Alive Xtreme Volleyball 3 was probably never going to be localized in the first place and the whole "we're not porting this because SJWs" thing was a controversy a some random pr guy stirred up to boost import sales. I really don't think a Japanese developer is going to give a shit if some shitlord bloggers bitch about sexism in videogames.[/QUOTE]
Well sometimes I do get the impression the Japanese would decide not to localize a game if they thought it might slightly startle a pigeon somewhere.
The post you're talking about was by a guy who clearly didn't have English as a first language, that was soon retracted by the company itself alongside an apology.
This is a thing I just don't get about that event. Why is some type of social experiment gamble to increase import sales through a specific third party venue apparently more plausible than a corporate nobody speaking his mind expecting no one to really care too much, then getting smacked down by the PR department once it gets circulated?
[QUOTE=DiscoMelon;49538977]Not disagreeing with you on censorship but Dead or Alive Xtreme Volleyball 3 was probably never going to be localized in the first place and the whole "we're not porting this because SJWs" thing was a controversy a some random pr guy stirred up to boost import sales. I really don't think a Japanese developer is going to give a shit if some shitlord bloggers bitch about sexism in videogames.[/QUOTE]
why would they not localize in the place the series sold the most in?
[QUOTE=Wii60;49539025]why would they not localize in the place the series sold the most in?[/QUOTE]
Just because it sold the most doesn't mean it was the most profitable here.
[QUOTE=DiscoMelon;49538977]Not disagreeing with you on censorship but Dead or Alive Xtreme Volleyball 3 was probably never going to be localized in the first place and the whole "we're not porting this because SJWs" thing was a controversy a some random pr guy stirred up to boost import sales. I really don't think a Japanese developer is going to give a shit if some shitlord bloggers bitch about sexism in videogames.[/QUOTE]
Well there is this:
[IMG]https://i.imgur.com/yOxdXOe.png[/IMG]
But hey, what do [I]all of these industry professionals[/I] know?
Oh, slap the recent valkyrie drive decision on top of that while you're at it.
The problem is, that those games and those depictions are really problematic in the western world. I for one can tell you that they don't make me comfortable. Sure you can go and say I can avoid these games, the problem is how widespread this kind of thing is.
Not to mention it tends to creep into places where it wasn't an issue before.
Honestly I think a bigger driving force behind them not localising is ratings boards rather than fan reactions. These depictions will probably see these games get bumped in age appropriate brackets in the western world, while they might be in far lower ones in Japan. Creates huge issues in ads among other things.
I'd rather they somewhat change the artstyle in a a western release than completely refuse to translate, but that's me.
Mind you, this really is probably a lot less about SJWs screaming murder and more about the fact that similar depictions are just seen as problematic in the western world. They might appeal to you, you might not notice them, but in they are on the lesser end of acceptable.
Every single game in that picture besides Street Fighter is already rated M (Although Nep does flop between M and T). And Fatal Frame is a horror game on top of that. You know, the genre that's [i]supposed[/i] to make you uncomfortable?
Unless you think any of those are "problematic" enough to earn an AO, in which case we're on a whole new level of issues.
[QUOTE=wraithcat;49544081]The problem is, that those games and those depictions are really problematic in the western world. I for one can tell you that they don't make me comfortable. Sure you can go and say I can avoid these games, the problem is how widespread this kind of thing is.
Not to mention it tends to creep into places where it wasn't an issue before.
Honestly I think a bigger driving force behind them not localising is ratings boards rather than fan reactions. These depictions will probably see these games get bumped in age appropriate brackets in the western world, while they might be in far lower ones in Japan. Creates huge issues in ads among other things.
I'd rather they somewhat change the artstyle in a a western release than completely refuse to translate, but that's me.
Mind you, this really is probably a lot less about SJWs screaming murder and more about the fact that similar depictions are just seen as problematic in the western world. They might appeal to you, you might not notice them, but in they are on the lesser end of acceptable.[/QUOTE]
Ah the old "they make me uncomfortable so no one else should be able to enjoy it" argument. The world doesn't revolve around you and your feelings or how "problematic" you think something is.
For the record, those games don't particulalry interest me - but I would have done what I've always done. Not buy games that don't interest me. Instead of saying "they should change the artstyle to match what I find comfortable".
And we live in a western society that supposedly is about allowong free expression, yet your argument is against that. It doesn't matter if if "acceptable" to you or not, it's not your job or place to play moral police. They shouldn't feel pressured to not release things for those reasons in a society that is about free expression.
[QUOTE=bdd458;49544261]Ah the old "they make me uncomfortable so no one else should be able to enjoy it" argument. The world doesn't revolve around you and your feelings or how "problematic" you think something is.
For the record, those games don't particulalry interest me - but I would have done what I've always done. Not buy games that don't interest me. Instead of saying "they should change the artstyle to match what I find comfortable".
And we live in a western society that supposedly is about allowong free expression, yet your argument is against that. It doesn't matter if if "acceptable" to you or not, it's not your job or place to play moral police. They shouldn't feel pressured to not release things for those reasons in a society that is about free expression.[/QUOTE]
Sure and like I've said - my best guess is that they're facing pressure from rating boards, advertisers and retailers instead. Random screams of a small group of people aren't doing that much. But retailers not completely willing to stock these games, put them on front displays and many other things associated with marketing, selling and whatever else for these games, might make them less attractive to the publishers in the long run.
If there wasn't a very direct negative financial aspect to this, those very same publishers wouldn't really even take a breather before flooding the market.
It's possible that getting over all of this makes releasing the games just not lucrative enough, compared to keeping them domestic.
Sure they can still make some money, they might even the highest turnovers, but the costs are too high. I'm sure someone will say that it's rather the developers wanting to keep their artististic integrity, but I strongly doubt that's the case.
As to ratings - it seems that SF5 got to ESRB T only after cutting some stuff, while it had no problem reaching CERO B. It's also important to note that there are generally differences between ESRB M and CERO D. With CERO D allowing for far more sexualised content.
Never have I said they should not be allowed to release their games. I'm just saying, that the reasons for them not releasing them stem from far more than a group of people on the internet being angry. The only thing that would make them to not release those games is the lack of lucrativity, and my best guess is that a significant portion of this comes from rating agencies. Though those probably are merely one of the hurdles. Notice that all those changes, or refusals to release came internally. Which indicates a financial, marketing angle. It's for instance obvious why nintendo would remove a lingerie costumes from a game released in the west, as nintendo generally markets itself as family friendly. What constitutes that is different between cultures.
I'd like to point out this woman complained that the FBI wasn't taking her seriously about Gamergate.
That's the kind of Looney shit we're talking about.
I'm just sick of puritans whining and screaming trying to change or "tone down" works that are not their own.
The cherry on top being that they do this from a country that's big on freedom of expression.
I find it fucked up that we can murder "people" literally in the millions in these games and nobody bats an eye. Oh wait, there's a dick? And a woman is showing skin? STOP IT! SHUT EVERYTHING DOWN!
The mentality is fucking retarded.
[QUOTE=Solo Wing;49546626]I'm just sick of puritans whining and screaming trying to change or "tone down" works that are not their own.
The cherry on top being that they do this from a country that's big on freedom of expression.
I find it fucked up that we can murder "people" literally in the millions in these games and nobody bats an eye. Oh wait, there's a dick? And a woman is showing skin? STOP IT! SHUT EVERYTHING DOWN!
The mentality is fucking retarded.[/QUOTE]
What's fucked is that companies have learned to ignore religious puritans but now pay homage to feminist puritans.
Why is the thread getting derailed towards sexual content in video games? The article is about a twitter game that was taken by the developers themselves, and shows no signs of strong arming.
[QUOTE=plunger435;49547558]Why is the thread getting derailed towards sexual content in video games? The article is about a twitter game that was taken by the developers themselves, and shows no signs of strong arming.[/QUOTE]
They took it down after the woman, a [B]fucking congresswoman[/B], made a big deal out of it with a letter. I'm fairly certain if they didn't take it down, she could've easily blown it out of proportion like it already has been. You don't actually need to strong arm to cause self censorship, the threat of it alone can cause it.
[QUOTE=plunger435;49547558]Why is the thread getting derailed towards sexual content in video games? The article is about a twitter game that was taken by the developers themselves, and shows no signs of strong arming.[/QUOTE]
She's a congresswoman so she is strong arming. Sexualization is related to this because she's calling for censorship over hurt feelings, sexualization is one of those things that seem to hurt feelings.
There's nothing to indicate the developers thought that though. They responded to it on Twitter and said they were addressing any of those concerns.
[editline]17th January 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;49547850]She's a congresswoman so she is strong arming. Sexualization is related to this because she's calling for censorship over hurt feelings, sexualization is one of those things that seem to hurt feelings.[/QUOTE]
So anyone in congress sending people letters is now strong arming simply because of their station.
The cultural marxist left strikes once again, and the shitty part is there is nothing we can do to stop it.
[QUOTE=Wii60;49537966]a government official pressures someone to take down their content and we arn't calling it censorship?
don't need to.
[media]https://twitter.com/RepKClark/status/621734750198341632[/media]
SJW's confirmed for literally taking peoples games away via government censorship.[/QUOTE]
wii60 confirmed for continually misinformed victim of scare mongering and "sjw" propaganda
[media]https://twitter.com/getstolen/status/688272218866843649[/media]
devs sad they had to take the game down
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
