Sony forcing Japan only games to go through content inspections which are conducted in English

Corporations are not people.


Oh, well we're done here.
They are with citizens united. They got full speech rights. The corporations said FUCK YOU BITCH. MY VOICE IS LOUDER. I GOTS THE PAPER STACKS. WHY YOU JELLY BROKE ASS MOTHER FUCKER? EAT A SACK OF BABY DICKS.

Game recognize game, and you looking rather unfamiliar right now Zog. You got ZUG TUGGED.
 
Corporations are not people.
They aren't, but they are treated as such ever since the concept of "Corporate Personhood" became a thing.

And yes, they seem to have more rights than actual people (even though they are not supposed to). :(

Wow, this thread really went off on a tangent.
 
Last edited:

Danjin44

The nicest person on this forum
I wish Sony could understand that by censoring theses games it's still wouldn't going to get the mass appeal they are hoping for. People who are not interested in theses type of games are not going to get it regardless it's censored or not. Only thing this pointless censoring does is piss off the actual audience for these already niche games.
 
Why do I get the impression that this way of thinking is due to the current ceo?
He's closer to home and less of an international guy like Hirai was, seeing sex is taboo and female parts are still censored there I can't help but think that it's exactly this way of thinking that set them back for decades when compared to e.g. Korean companies or the west.

Then again using English people to do it is weird, this sounds a mess that didn't require any attention to begin with.
I'd rather see them do the opposite instead constantly trying to protect the childrens in an adult world, give options instead of taking them away.
 
Imagine if Chinese censors made an American game developer based in the US censor their work for the US market, and conduct their content inspections in Mandarin at 4am in the morning.
 
Last edited:
Sony just shot themselves in the foot.

I don't know how much the rest of you know about Japanese culture (I'm an expert), but honor and shame are huge parts of it. It's not like it is in America where you can become successful by being an asshole. If you screw someone over in Japan, you bring shame to yourself, and the only way to get rid of that shame is repentance.

What this means is the japanese public, after hearing about this, is not going to want to purchase Visual Novels for their PS4, nor will they purchase any of Sony games. This is HUGE. You can laugh all you want, but Sony has alienated an entire market with this move.

Sony, publicly apologize and cancel censoring our anime fan-service or you can kiss your business goodbye.
 
Imagine if Chinese censors made an American game developer based in the US censor their work for the US market, and conduct their content inspections in Mandarin at 4am in the morning.
Many foreign developers are actually developing games and apps for the 1 billion mobile phone users Chinese market so it would not surprise me
 
I'm surprised Catherine: Full Body is still planned for PS4. If they will have to make cuts before the final release, let's hope it increases our chances for a port to another console/PC..
 
Last edited:
I'm surprised Catherine: Full Body is still planned for PS4. If they will have to make cuts before the final release, let's hope it increases our chances for a port to another console/PC..
If I hear they censored Full Body because of Sony then it's strike 2. 3 Strikes and fuck a PS5. Missing out on great games because I don't like the company behind them isn't new to me. I might not have a lot of morality left, but I have enough to stand against this nonsense.
 
https://www.change.org/p/sony-towards-sony-their-new-policies

The petition just got 2000 more signatures suddenly after this news and i see a lot of Japanese names signing. i guess Japanese gamers are now fighting this new censorship policies with us.

Im not surprised that most of the gaming journalist sites are ignoring this censorship news because they cannot push their agenda this time.
It goes in line with their agenda actually, the censorship that is, but they know they are a vocal minority, and can't openly celebrate such travesty lest the ire of the majority squelches this pathetic small victory.
 
Regarding prominent Western media outlets that have grown increasingly progressive in their views, keeping mum on the matter and celebrating things as a silent victory really is to their advantage. Sure, they could write pieces praising or trying to analyze this new Sony policy, but given the nature of the Internet, they'd likely be doing more good in helping to spread awareness of the situation, rather than bolster their fight against the tyranny of anime tiddies.
 
If I hear they censored Full Body because of Sony then it's strike 2. 3 Strikes and fuck a PS5. Missing out on great games because I don't like the company behind them isn't new to me. I might not have a lot of morality left, but I have enough to stand against this nonsense.
Sony already committed more than 3 strikes:

1. They caved into the left authoritarian mob and barred Super Seducer from being sold on PSN.
2. After Omega Labyrinth Z passed through ESRB, SIE banned the game from release in NA and Europe.
3. Sony forced XSEED to delay Senran Kagura Re:Newal's western release to remove the intimacy mode when the feature was in previous games without problems. The Playstation UK Twitter account's response to the criticisms against this censorship was condescending to the consumers.
4. Of course, the topic of this thread. Forcing Japanese developers to censor their games in Japan as well as having to communicate with Playstation HQ in English during US west coast business hours is ludicrous.
 
Sony already committed more than 3 strikes:

1. They caved into the left authoritarian mob and barred Super Seducer from being sold on PSN.
2. After Omega Labyrinth Z passed through ESRB, SIE banned the game from release in NA and Europe.
3. Sony forced XSEED to delay Senran Kagura Re:Newal's western release to remove the intimacy mode when the feature was in previous games without problems. The Playstation UK Twitter account's response to the criticisms against this censorship was condescending to the consumers.
4. Of course, the topic of this thread. Forcing Japanese developers to censor their games in Japan as well as having to communicate with Playstation HQ in English during US west coast business hours is ludicrous.
I am going by the explosion of recent developments and attempting to wait and see if they come to rationale. I've read this whole thread and the other one about censorship, which, I might add, is a fantastic read.
 
But again, nobody is guaranteed a platform or the right to communicate with the masses, just that the government won't interrupt your right to freedom of speech. He can say what he wants, and if he needs a place from which to spread his words out far and none of the current carriers wish to be associated with him, he is fully within his legal rights to start his own.

Those carriers have freedom of speech as well, and this extends to who they wish to have on their service.
They aren't being disenfranchised, they still have methods with which to spread their message. However, if people find their message to be repulsive and no longer wish to support it, then that's within their rights. You can say that it seems wrong, but the only possible way to make it "right" would be a complete violation of freedom of speech rights.

As for the second part you mentioned, racism against white men is different, due to history and how these comments punch. Punching up is different than punching down, and is treated differently. That being said, there have been examples of people being fired for anti-white racism and comments, but it's usually more direct. Saying something like "all white people are evil" or "I hate all white people" is wrong and racist; saying, "White men have been behind laws in the country that discriminate and disenfranchise." is not.

The "folks" they are referring to are the ISP's, not the individual companies such as Paypal or Youtube. Again, I'm not fully versed in what laws utilities have to follow, but the sole idea behind net neutrality has nothing to do with content, but the idea that all data should be treated equally, with the ISP's passing a random webpage to you with the same speed and priority as Google or Netflix.

It's to prevent something like this



from happening.
So who decides who is 'toxic' and who isn't? Is starving wikileaks of donations a good thing for example? You don't see how this is a slippery slope? The point of free speech is to protect the speech of the outsiders otherwise there is no need for free speech protections.

& having a handful of American corporations controlling global communication sounds real shitty. Their control of US communication and de-platforming viewpoints is one of the main reasons the US has been at constant war for 20 years, that there are no anti-war candidates, and nobody talks about how their economy needs war to function.
 
I've not heard an

snip

race and religion.
the deplatforming actually started after he began explaining the situation in Syria and criticizing US antagonism towards Russia.

They aren't, but they are treated as such ever since the concept of "Corporate Personhood" became a thing.

And yes, they seem to have more rights than actual people (even though they are not supposed to). :(

Wow, this thread really went off on a tangent.
They are also immortal. Puny human, you don't stand a chance.
 
So who decides who is 'toxic' and who isn't? Is starving wikileaks of donations a good thing for example? You don't see how this is a slippery slope? The point of free speech is to protect the speech of the outsiders otherwise there is no need for free speech protections.

& having a handful of American corporations controlling global communication sounds real shitty. Their control of US communication and de-platforming viewpoints is one of the main reasons the US has been at constant war for 20 years, that there are no anti-war candidates, and nobody talks about how their economy needs war to function.
People decide who is toxic and who isn't. Everyone has freedom of speech here. The "toxic" person has freedom of speech to say what they want, the public has freedom of speech to decide if they want to support it or not financially, and the corporations have freedom of speech to decide who they want on their platform representing them.

Again, freedom of speech doesn't guarantee you a platform, only the fact that the government won't file legal charges against you for the words that you say. If every main hosting platform kicks you off, no mainstream papers/magazines want to publish you, and no payment services want to process for you, maybe it's because they all find you too repulsive to want to deal with, and that is their choice to make. They have the freedom to do so.

What would the other option be?
 
People decide who is toxic and who isn't.
You have a funny way of spelling "left wing politics force speech codes on society which then forces corporations which then force it on people and literally decide on a case by case basis depending on the person "is he a lefty or a righty? male or female?" because toxic means whatever anyone wants it to mean. Deliberately undefined words that anyone can build their castle walls around, its bullshit, it was always bullshit since liberals forced this crap on everyone and it will remain bullshit in the future as well.
 
Last edited:
At the end of the day, corporations are all about money. If the public rejects your ass for being too much of a shitheel, then the corporations will find you too toxic to want to deal with, to want to associate with, to want to do business with. You can blame anyone you want for this, any ideology you want for this, but what you can't do is wish it away.
 
Looks like PS4 will be my last Sony console. We had a good run. When you've lost me you know ya done fucked up. Looks like I join the PC master race for good.
 
At the end of the day, corporations are all about money. If the public rejects your ass for being too much of a shitheel, then the corporations will find you too toxic to want to deal with, to want to associate with, to want to do business with. You can blame anyone you want for this, any ideology you want for this, but what you can't do is wish it away.
You forgot the part where corporations may be subject to government regulation, especially if those corporations are of the public utility strain...
 
You forgot the part where corporations may be subject to government regulation, especially if those corporations are of the public utility strain...
That only really counts in terms of utilities however, which is one of the reasons why I really hope Net Neutrality comes back. So that the flow of data can be treated same as the flow of water or electricity. That being said, Facebook, Twitter, and Paypal are not public utilities, they are private corporations with competition. Still, Republicans were always all for the government not interfering in the day to day of private companies until it started negatively affecting them.
 
That only really counts in terms of utilities however, which is one of the reasons why I really hope Net Neutrality comes back. So that the flow of data can be treated same as the flow of water or electricity. That being said, Facebook, Twitter, and Paypal are not public utilities, they are private corporations with competition. Still, Republicans were always all for the government not interfering in the day to day of private companies until it started negatively affecting them.
They are private corporations who may be subject to government regulation, that's the point.
 
I'm willing to drop it whenever, but people (you included) keep bringing it back up. You have questions, I have answers. When the questions stop, so do the responses.
I assumed there is an overarching point you were trying to make. If you don't have one, then you should've just taken the conversation to PM.
 
Last edited:
This here is one thing that bugs me the most. Over on ReeeeeEra and other outlets I saw a ton of people agreeing with this new policy, but I bet as soon as it came to something they actually like they would make a big stink about it.
I wonder how many people that were shrugging off Dead or Alive 6's fanservice toning down when it was announced, and even praising Team Ninja for it, were shitting on Team Ninja for what they did with Ninja Gaiden Sigma 2 on PS3 compared to Ninja Gaiden II on 360 for the massive censoring of violence?
 
Last edited:
They are also immortal. Puny human, you don't stand a chance.
The greater the IQ the likelier an agent is to support free speech. Posthumans will be immortal, have greater intellectual capacity than any man, and have power enough to overpower any nation. If they decide to protect free speech, no nation will be able to restrict free speech.
What would the other option be?
They have a special protection called safe harbor, that means they can't be held liable for content posted in their platforms. If they exercise editorial control, they are publishers and should lose that protection.

Every copyright violation, every call to violence, every shooter or violent activist they've allowed, revenge porn, etc they should be held liable.
At the end of the day, corporations are all about money. If the public rejects your ass for being too much of a shitheel, then the corporations will find you too toxic to want to deal with, to want to associate with, to want to do business with. You can blame anyone you want for this, any ideology you want for this, but what you can't do is wish it away.
The same companies that allow, misandrist speech, antiwhite racist speech, and violent activists on the left.

You should lose safe harbor if you do not support free speech.
 
Last edited:
The greater the IQ the likelier an agent is to support free speech. Posthumans will be immortal, have greater intellectual capacity than any man, and have power enough to overpower any nation. If they decide to protect free speech, no nation will be able to restrict free speech.

They have a special protection called safe harbor, that means they can't be held liable for content posted in their platforms. If they exercise editorial control, they are publishers and should lose that protection.

Every copyright violation, every call to violence, every shooter or violent activist they've allowed, revenge porn, etc they should be held liable.

The same companies that allow, misandrist speech, antiwhite racist speech, and violent activists on the left.

You should lose safe harbor if you do not support free speech.
First off, it's not legal reasons why these companies choose to deplatform. They do it because the public at large has rejected these people and those who do business with them. If doing business with Alex Jones means you lose 80% of your customers, then why do business with Alex Jones?

As for part two, these companies kick people like that off all the time. Hell, Twitter is known for having the problem of allowing Neo-nazis on their platform with no restrictions, but blocking/ignoring people who complain about them.
 
People shouldn't be surprised.

When you're the #1 dog, it's all about catering to the masses in the most friendly way possible. It sound counter-intuitive though right? You'd think the company with the biggest audience would be most open minded so it can satisfy the huge mass of games from different spectrums. it's not like Sony aims specifically at a niche audience.

But money talks.

And the most money almost always comes from the biggest audience. And if you want to keep it, sometimes you got to ixnay the products and audience the general population considers unsavoury.

Just like Walmart. Huge store that sells products to everyone. You won't find a porn mag on their shelves.
 
First off, it's not legal reasons why these companies choose to deplatform. They do it because the public at large has rejected these people and those who do business with them. If doing business with Alex Jones means you lose 80% of your customers, then why do business with Alex Jones?

As for part two, these companies kick people like that off all the time. Hell, Twitter is known for having the problem of allowing Neo-nazis on their platform with no restrictions, but blocking/ignoring people who complain about them.
Jones was having record breaking sales, his app was rapidly reaching top 5 if not number one news app before deplatforming. lose 80%? more like BS.

What they've done may have cost them more. And now there is pressure to deregulate and introduce competitors that will take away some of their business. And they should be held liable for what they finance, host, or allow on their platform, if they're gonna take this stance,
if liability is found to apply to them they'll soon face bankruptcy.
And the most money almost always comes from the biggest audience. And if you want to keep it, sometimes you got to ixnay the products and audience the general population considers unsavoury.

Just like Walmart. Huge store that sells products to everyone. You won't find a porn mag on their shelves.
but you will find gta and game of thrones.

These double standards. Companies filled with BS.
 
Last edited: