Support NeoGAF

[StreetsofBeige]

but you will find gta and game of thrones.

These double standards. Companies filled with BS.

Good point.

But US standards is that violence is acceptable. But sex is not, and definitely not when it comes to racy stuff with young characters.

But an argument can made, God of War had sex mini games, and pretty sure Walmart sells calendars and magazines with swimsuit models and hotties. And they are allowed. But those are aimed at the adult crowd.

But I think Sony doesn't like the fact sexual scenes involve anime girls. Because lets' face it. It's games. And no matter what a game maker says, that "40 year old" anime girl still has an art style making her look like she's 14.

No companies in the western world want to get involved with that stuff. Maybe in Japan where you have all kinds of creepy Hentei games the government and general populace doesn't care, but here they do.

 

[Pallas]

Good point.

But US standards is that violence is acceptable. But sex is not, and definitely not when it comes to racy stuff with young characters.

But an argument can made, God of War had sex mini games, and pretty sure Walmart sells calendars and magazines with swimsuit models and hotties. And they are allowed. But those are aimed at the adult crowd.

But I think Sony doesn't like the fact sexual scenes involve anime girls. Because lets' face it. It's games. And no matter what a game maker says, that "40 year old" anime girl still has an art style making her look like she's 14.

No companies in the western world want to get involved with that stuff. Maybe in Japan where you have all kinds of creepy Hentei games the government and general populace doesn't care, but here they do.

Except for Steam and NoA right? I don’t even really care if they don’t want to bring those kind of games over but to censor them in their own country where the perception is different(Nudity/racy content is ok, Violence not so much) is ridiculous. No I’m not someone who supports underage stuff, but even games where the characters are at age are being out through this newly implemented system if it has anime fan service.

Honestly it almost seems like Sony intentionally made the process difficult to discourage and hinder Japanese developers from even attempting. That’s my assumption and opinion and not a fact though.

I don’t want to put the tinfoil hat on and say it’s all because of leftist media/Western politics and SJW’s(plus isn’t censoring more of a conservative method?) infiltrated Sony. I’m sure if there’s a big enough backlash with the community, here and in Japan, it may get them to change their stance, until then though... I guess you’ll need a Switch or a computer with Steam for the fan service games since I highly doubt Xbox is a viable option right now for those developers.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Except for Steam and NoA right? I don’t even really care if they don’t want to bring those kind of games over but to censor them in their own country where the perception is different(Nudity/racy content is ok, Violence not so much) is ridiculous. No I’m not someone who supports underage stuff, but even games where the characters are at age are being out through this newly implemented system if it has anime fan service.

Honestly it almost seems like Sony intentionally made the process difficult to discourage and hinder Japanese developers from even attempting. That’s my assumption and opinion and not a fact though.

I don’t want to put the tinfoil hat on and say it’s all because of leftist media/Western politics and SJW’s(plus isn’t censoring more of a conservative method?) infiltrated Sony. I’m sure if there’s a big enough backlash with the community, here and in Japan, it may get them to change their stance, until then though... I guess you’ll need a Switch or a computer with Steam for the fan service games since I highly doubt Xbox is a viable option right now for those developers.

Personally, I think Sony doesn't want the attention as they are winning the race. Don't need people ruffling the feathers.

It's like Apple. Remember when nobody cared about them? They were all about being the rebel and different. PC users are boring lemmings kind of thing. Now what? Apple's marketing is all about being for the masses.... "I'm a doctor, I'm a teacher, I'm a firefighter.... we all use Apple products". U2 is among the most mainstream bands in the world. No more rebel BS, even though some hardcore Apple users surely hated them conforming to the masses and using Intel chips.

Pretty sure Apple doesn't care about that 1% of users anymore when there's a gigantic mass of other users 100x the size.

Nintendo has always been the more kid friendly option. However, they've opened up this gen and Wii U with more games and gore simply because they need the user base, and they want to grow the image to include as many Bethesda, shooters and R* games they can get.

 

[The_Mike]

Love and eroticism? To hell with that shit.
We need more normal euroamerican content, like good old violence!

What in the flying fuck is wrong with you people? Seriously.

The keyword is it looks like little girls, which is unacceptable in the western society.

What a time to be alive where people rage over their hentai games disappearing in public. It’s almost like openly talk about porn in public.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

The keyword is it looks like little girls, which is unacceptable in the western society.

What a time to be alive where people rage over their hentai games disappearing in public. It’s almost like openly talk about porn in public.

And not only that, but the way the games are promoted.

God of War might have silly sex games where you hammer buttons to rock a bed, nude women in GTA and Leisure Suit Larry is try to get in bed with as many women as possible, but the message is different. You don't see these types of things promoted. And the sexiness is a small part of the game. It's more like an afterthought.

In these anime games with teenage girls there's no shame. It's basically look at me horndog! I'm a young girl with a skirt spreading my legs, come get it.

If a game maker doesn't want the attention and wants to slip a game through hoping nobody notices, tidy up the visuals and don't promote it so blatantly.

 

[Vtecomega]

Time to jump ship to xbox next gen. I'm already half way there with my recently purchased xbox x. Sony can fuck off with their sjw propaganda and their soy boy first party devs.

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

But US standards is that violence is acceptable. But sex is not, and definitely not when it comes to racy stuff with young characters.

Walmart has anime in their dvd section. It wouldn't surprise me if they've got pretty questionable stuff in that area.

Also big mouth, when the season blu ray release, I'm sure they'll have it in their store. Not to mention rick and morty. Or what about south park?

 

[Pallas]

Walmart has anime in their dvd section. It wouldn't surprise me if they've got pretty questionable stuff in that area.

Also big mouth, when the season blu ray release, I'm sure they'll have it in their store. Not to mention rick and morty. Or what about south park?

I know I saw Gantz boxset at Walmart couple years back, full of fan service and questionable content.

 

[Dunki]

The porn thing isn't censorship, it's more about tighter age verification checks; it's dumb, I agree, but not quite censorship. The meme thing is again related to clamping down on what normies deem as online hate speech; not quite in the same category as adult entertainment.

The so called meme Thing is much more than that. Basically you can Not Even Quote news articles anymore. Everthing done falls under the Copyright law. People just explain it with memes because ist easy to Understand

 

[Ar¢tos]

What if the reason is fear?
Imagine one of the loud SJW groups labelling PlayStation pedophile friendly because of one of these anime games and the label sticks with the media. The financial damages would be massive and recovering from a label like that would be a challenge. Maybe they aren't SJW, but are rather afraid of their social media power (they have proven how loud they can be).

Did Sony unified the certification department in the west? I can see no other reason for them to request devs to provide content description in English, but they still should have people that speak Japanese to deal with Japanese devs/suppliers/etc. Maybe its a temporary thing.

 

[joe_zazen]

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' wtf does that mean? Those who decide are a handful of billionaires (or their agents) who sit on boards of directors, American lawmakers, and the American military-intelligence complex. The 'people' believe what they are told through official channels which includes things like the NYT, just ask Prof Chomsky about the propaganda state the US has become, or Assange about what happens when you use free speech to threaten power.

You really need to understand that your way of thinking leads to tyranny and continual war.

And again, Alex Jones was only targeted when he began to attack US military policy in the middle east and the propaganda campaign and aggression against Russia. Do you find the questioning of those things repulsive?

+++++

The threat to peaceful existence and even existence itself has always been the way power tends to accrete more power and morph into to tyranny. It is part of our collective nature. Until now the only forces that have been able to check and reverse that process have been catastrophic events like state collapse, mass death from famine/disease, and large scale war (see The Great Leveller for historic context, + Capital by Piketty and Who Controls the World by Chomsky for a primer on current reality). The framers of the constitution recognized this and tried to build in preventive measures, like freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, the right to bear arms, representative democracy etc. Our public spaces today are virtual, and if you close access to them because 'people' decide some viewpoint (right or wrong) is repulsive, then these freedoms are no longer freedoms.

anyway, I'll drop a couple of Orwell quotes and await your explanation of why corporate control of speech is a good thing.

The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from the oligarchies of the past in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just around the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now you begin to understand me.



War is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
Ignorance is strength

++++++

The better question would be how does this circle back to the topic of this thread?

Telling someone what they can or cannot say because you are the one with money and power is going on here. Sure it is on a tiny tiny inconsequential scale, but you know, you can see the universe in a grain of sand or something like that.

 

[Vlaphor]

Telling someone what they can or cannot say because you are the one with money and power is going on here. Sure it is on a tiny tiny inconsequential scale, but you know, you can see the universe in a grain of sand or something like that.

Again, this was never about telling someone what they can or can't say, but merely pointing out that they are not guaranteed a platform from which to say it. When Fox News was at it's apex, you didn't hear the left screaming about how they should be allowed on there to spread their message as well. Freedom of speech says that the government wont punish you for what you say, but that's it. Other people don't have to listen to what you are saying.

To be honest, I'm done with this whole conversation. Everything that gets posted is some variation of "Paypal, Youtube, Twitter, Etc. should be forced to carry content they don't want to", and that is in violation of the law.

 

[Enygger_Tzu]

Freedom of speech says that the government wont punish you for what you say, but that's it. Other people don't have to listen to what you are saying.

Freedom of speech means no one get punished from his opinions. Period.

 

[Vlaphor]

Freedom of speech means no one get punished from his opinions. Period.

From the government. Actions still have consequences, or does freedom of speech not apply to those who dislike what you say as and longer wish to support you.

 

[Enygger_Tzu]

From the government. Actions still have consequences, or does freedom of speech not apply to those who dislike what you say as and longer wish to support you.

From everyone. If you are actioned against because you had a different opinion then it is a violation of freedom of speech.

 

[SLoWMoTIoN]

Its inexcusable and bullying. Sony is only aiming this at straight people's niche games in their own country. None of the gay games are being censored. Its actually happening, a once Japanese company has been completely neutered and maybe genderfied/california'd.

What if the reason is fear?
Imagine one of the loud SJW groups labelling PlayStation pedophile friendly because of one of these anime games and the label sticks with the media. The financial damages would be massive and recovering from a label like that would be a challenge. Maybe they aren't SJW, but are rather afraid of their social media power (they have proven how loud they can be).

Did Sony unified the certification department in the west? I can see no other reason for them to request devs to provide content description in English, but they still should have people that speak Japanese to deal with Japanese devs/suppliers/etc. Maybe its a temporary thing.

None of this happened. Sony just one day decided to do this. Next gen is almost here and were are getting Cali geared Playstation. Time to bail friend.

 

[Vlaphor]

From everyone. If you are actioned against because you had a different opinion then it is a violation of freedom of speech.

Again, how is that not a violation of their freedom of speech? If someone says something like "An event where twenty children were killed is a conspiracy" and I find that person repulsive and no longer wish to do business with them or anyone who supports them, what are my options. Am I required to still do business with them, even though I don't want to anymore?

Here is the actual first amendment that guarantees freedom of speech.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Says nothing about how businesses and people have to behave, only that the government cannot interfere in the freedom of speech. Again, what you are asking for is impossible. Everyone has freedom of speech, which includes the freedom to say what they want and the freedom to respond how they choose, as long as the response falls within the law, and taking your business elsewhere falls within the law.

 

[Enygger_Tzu]

Again, how is that not a violation of their freedom of speech? If someone says something like "An event where twenty children were killed is a conspiracy" and I find that person repulsive and no longer wish to do business with them or anyone who supports them, what are my options. Am I required to still do business with them, even though I don't want to anymore?

Here is the actual first amendment that guarantees freedom of speech.

Of course, the person in question can sue you, drag you to the court, fine you, maybe have you imprisoned and then have you both host his show AND ALSO bake him a wedding gay cake...you know, you can't hide behind a tree that has been cut down.

Freedom of speech is a natural right, not a government one.

 

[Vlaphor]

Of course, the person in question can sue you, drag you to the court, fine you, maybe have you imprisoned and then have you both host his show AND ALSO bake him a wedding gay cake...you know, you can't hide behind a tree that has been cut down.

Freedom of speech is a natural right, not a government one.

What you are asking for isn't freedom of speech, it's freedom from consequences. People will react to the things that you say how they choose.

 

[Enygger_Tzu]

What you are asking for isn't freedom of speech, it's freedom from consequences. People will react to the things that you say how they choose.

That is freedom of speech, no consequences for your opinions.

 

[Vlaphor]

That is freedom of speech, no consequences for your opinions.

Freedom of speech goes both ways. If I no longer want to support someone who says something horrific, it's my freedom to do so.

 

[Enygger_Tzu]

Freedom of speech goes both ways. If I no longer want to support someone who says something horrific, it's my freedom to do so.

And said someone can get you sued, fined, and maybe imprisoned and actual FORCED to support you and THEN, make you bake him a gay wedding cake. It is that simple as seen the last couple of years.

 

[Vlaphor]

And said someone can get you sued, fined, and maybe imprisoned and actual FORCED to support you and THEN, make you bake him a gay wedding cake. It is that simple as seen the last couple of years.

The last part fell under the commerce clause, which says you have to do business with everyone regardless of a series of things mentioned in the civil rights act. Also, the supreme court narrowly ruled in the bakers favor.

http://www.scotusblog.com/2018/06/o...owly-for-baker-in-same-sex-wedding-cake-case/

As for the first four you mentioned, I'm gonna need to see some receipts. As far as I know, nobody has been sued, fined, imprisoned, or forced to support a line of thought as a result of something they have said. The only consequence has been for them to be removed from services at the decision of the owners of said services, as they no longer wished to be associated with them.

 

[Enygger_Tzu]

The last part fell under the commerce clause, which says you have to do business with everyone regardless of a series of things mentioned in the civil rights act. Also, the supreme court narrowly ruled in the bakers favor.

And it only took them 6 years to reach this conclusion who was there in the Constitution, one wonders why.

If the Commerce Clause does not cover each case unilateral, then maybe, just maybe it is time to abolish it, alongside the Civil Rights act or bring it up to date to modern standards.

And I can only offer you the internet: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/free-speech-in-the-courtroom-top-5-campus-lawsuits-of-2017

 

[WeirdoStalkerJr]

I hope MS does the clever thing and offers all those japanese devs a new home. For their next console, that might really turn things around for them in Japan.

Lol Microsoft? If anything it would be Nintendo.

 

[Ar¢tos]

Its inexcusable and bullying. Sony is only aiming this at straight people's niche games in their own country. None of the gay games are being censored. Its actually happening, a once Japanese company has been completely neutered and maybe genderfied/california'd.


None of this happened. Sony just one day decided to do this. Next gen is almost here and were are getting Cali geared Playstation. Time to bail friend.

I think the use of the word "imagine" is a big giveway that I know it didn't happen and was setting a potential scenario.
But after that TLOU2 E3 kiss, there a lot more attention to what Sony does than before.

 

[The Chairman]

 

[Enygger_Tzu]

Playasia just got into my heart.

 

[Ulysses 31]

Playasia just got into my heart.

They didn't already when they pushed back the SJWs with their boycott because of DOAX3?

 

[Pot Meet Kettle]

From the government. Actions still have consequences, or does freedom of speech not apply to those who dislike what you say as and longer wish to support you.

Hitler Youth were not technically affiliated with the government when they were harassing and killing opposition members. There was a point in time when they were doing this before even reaching official positions. Same for the book burnings by "concerned citizens" "spontaneously" rounding books in libraries and decadent art to destroy, or when journalists and film makers were intimidated into stopping their speech compelled by "mob justice", getting inexplicably fired, refused accomodations, housing, food, schooling, etc.
I am definitely sure those behind those acts also justified their ways by that victims "had it coming to them", "it was the natural consequence of their actions", and they were "practicing their freedom of speech" by destroying other's.

By your assertion, that means there was zero, zilch, nada censorship going on in fascist countries. Or ever since the beginning of time, I guess. Censorship is a... social construct.

 

[Vlaphor]

Hitler Youth were not technically affiliated with the government when they were harassing and killing opposition members. There was a point in time when they were doing this before even reaching official positions. Same for the book burnings by "concerned citizens" "spontaneously" rounding books in libraries and decadent art to destroy, or when journalists and film makers were intimidated into stopping their speech compelled by "mob justice", getting inexplicably fired, refused accomodations, housing, food, schooling, etc.
I am definitely sure those behind those acts also justified their ways by that victims "had it coming to them", "it was the natural consequence of their actions", and they were "practicing their freedom of speech" by destroying other's.

By your assertion, that means there was zero, zilch, nada censorship going on in fascist countries. Or ever since the beginning of time, I guess. Censorship is a... social construct.

Again, what are you asking for? That people not be allowed to voice their displeasure? The stuff you mentioned earlier is harassment and is not related to free speech.

I'm not interested in what you all consider free speech or not, I'm interested in what you would want done to solve your complaints in a way that wouldn't violate someone else's freedom of speech.

As for fascist countries, they've never claimed to have freedom of speech, so they are irrelevant to this discussion

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

Again, this was never about telling someone what they can or can't say, but merely pointing out that they are not guaranteed a platform from which to say it. When Fox News was at it's apex, you didn't hear the left screaming about how they should be allowed on there to spread their message as well. Freedom of speech says that the government wont punish you for what you say, but that's it. Other people don't have to listen to what you are saying.

To be honest, I'm done with this whole conversation. Everything that gets posted is some variation of "Paypal, Youtube, Twitter, Etc. should be forced to carry content they don't want to", and that is in violation of the law.

Some have talked about deplatforming fox, but that would be quite a tough cookie, which may result in your so called action or consequences if attempted.

The thing is the first thing they said was, oh they have their own site, having facebook, twitter, etc take a political stance is fine. Now we don't have to listen to them, now means people are free to refuse them hosting, payment processing, etc on their own private corner of the internet. Don't wanna listen suddenly means they shouldn't even have a site on the internet at all. Slippery slope, eventually if left we don't want to listen may go like europe, political opponents deserve jail time for having an opposing or offensive view.

This is not you don't want to listen, this is taking their rental housing away, cancelling their credit cards, and all but making it impossible for them to exist on their own private property. Quite similar to the chinese social media credit system that some speak of.

I mean alex jones might eventually have to go monero only and establish his own hosting company. But it appears there are moves to deny domains even to hosting companies that don't align. And it wouldn't surprise me if they tried to make monero illegal.

You are pushing it. This is the same as the gay couple asking for a regular cake with no special design, any cake in the store, and being denied business because they're 'immoral' and wilful 'sinners' who 'offend' god.

This is coordinated persecution on the basis of political belief. Even out of their own private corner of the internet.

Again, what are you asking for? That people not be allowed to voice their displeasure? The stuff you mentioned earlier is harassment and is not related to free speech.

I'm not interested in what you all consider free speech or not, I'm interested in what you would want done to solve your complaints in a way that wouldn't violate someone else's freedom of speech.

As for fascist countries, they've never claimed to have freedom of speech, so they are irrelevant to this discussion

They are relevant, people want to make this into a fascist country,with the doublespeak of being against fascism.

These platforms, again they were given special protections, special protections they need to EXIST at all, the safe harbor, on the grounds that they wouldn't discriminate speech. They discriminate speech? They should be held liable for anything posted, they should lose safe harbor.

There are multiple lawsuits going through the courts, and it is likely congress will take legislative action.

 

[Vlaphor]

Some have talked about deplatforming fox, but that would be quite a tough cookie, which may result in your so call action or consequences if attempted.

The thing is the first thing they said was, oh they have their own site, having facebook, twitter, etc take a political stance is fine. Now we don't have to listen to them people are free to refuse them hosting, payment processing, etc on their own private corner of the internet.

This is not you don't want to listen, this is taking their rental housing away, cancelling their credit cards, and all but making it impossible for them to exist on their own private property. Quite similar to the chinese social media credit system that some speak of.

I mean alex jones might eventually have to go monero only and establish his own hosting company. But it appears there are moves to deny domains even to hosting companies that don't align. And it wouldn't surprise me if they tried to make monero illegal.

You are pushing it. This is the same as the gay couple asking for a regular cake with no special design, any cake in the store, and being denied business because they're 'immoral' and wilful 'sinners' who 'offend' god.


They are relevant, people want to make this into a fascist country,with the doublespeak of being against fascism.

These platforms, again they were given special protections, special protections they need to EXIST at all, the safe harbor, on the grounds that they wouldn't discriminate speech. They discriminate speech? They should be held liable for anything posted, they should lose safe harbor.

There are multiple lawsuits going through the courts, and it is likely congress will take legislative action.

You still haven't said what you would want done to fix this. If a company allows someone on their service and that person is so toxic that they drive everyone else and their customers away, does that company now just have to close?

Freedom of speech is a double-edged sword. You are free to say what you want, and other are free to response how they want. If you take away the ability for people to respond how they want, then you take away freedom of speech.

Again, there's a difference between protections provided by the constitution and the civil rights act, and someone being kicked off of a service due to something they said.

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

You still haven't said what you would want done to fix this. If a company allows someone on their service and that person is so toxic that they drive everyone else and their customers away, does that company now just have to close?

These platforms, again they were given special protections, special protections they need to EXIST at all, the safe harbor, on the grounds that they wouldn't discriminate speech. They discriminate speech? They should be held liable for anything posted, they should lose safe harbor.

If that happened only free speech social platforms would remain afloat. The ridiculous draconian measures the others would have to take to avoid litigation while policing content, and the massive expenses, would cost them most if not their entire audiences and they'd go out of business.

 

[Madonis]

Some of these restrictions seem reasonable, but others are just hilarious.

 

[Vlaphor]

If that happened only free speech social platforms would remain afloat. The ridiculous draconian measures the others would have to take to avoid litigation while policing content, and the massive expenses, would cost them most if not their entire audiences.

What should these so called protections do against boycotts and protests, both of which are forms of free speech? Again, does a company just have to close down if someone who works for them chases away all of their business by being toxic?

Alex Jones didn't lose his platform due to legal issues or the content holders worrying about policing his content. He lost it because enough people said "If you do business with this person, I won't do business with you." That's a boycott, something people in this very thread are talking about in regards to Sony for their actions.

 

[Dunki]

great compilation of these issues

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

What should these so called protections do against boycotts and protests, both of which are forms of free speech? Again, does a company just have to close down if someone who works for them chases away all of their business by being toxic?

? How much did star wars win by catering to this small protesting minority?

You seem to forget that they've targeted other conservatives too. They've tried to keep conservative alternative media from growing, while promoting the dying mainstream media to no end.

Your view that people can only accept echo chambers is questionable.

People can't witch hunt people they dislike out of the entire internet. That form of persecution is out of the question.

Boycott and protests? They have to choose be held liable and lose safe harbor to appease protesters(loud minority of low iq that favors censorship, and has low disposable income, thus is a net drain on advertisers and the platform.), or defend free speech. Of course they can have draconian policing, but these same protesters will be amongst those that move to more open platforms that allow free speech.

 

[KiteGr]

Looks like we'll start migrating to steam

 

[Vlaphor]

Boycott and protests? They have to choose be held liable and lose safe harbor to appease protesters(loud minority of low iq that favors censorship, and has low disposable income, thus is a net drain on advertisers and the platform.), or defend free speech. Of course they can have draconian policing, but these same protesters will be amongst those that move to more open platforms that allow free speech.

Before I say anything else, tell me what you mean by "Safe Harbor"? You keep bringing it up, so I'm curious just what you mean by it in terms of freedom of speech.

 

[CatCouch]

Saw this on Resetera:

https://www.resetera.com/threads/ge...t-sony-regulations.77431/page-7#post-14370449

Mary Skelter 2 has the purification system removed at Sony's request according to the Chinese localization team. I assume if it's removed there, it's removed everywhere.

I bought the first one, guess I won't be buying this one, at least not on a Sony platform. This is just sad. I feel bad for the people working on these games.

 

[Enygger_Tzu]

Saw this on Resetera:

https://www.resetera.com/threads/ge...t-sony-regulations.77431/page-7#post-14370449

Mary Skelter 2 has the purification system removed at Sony's request according to the Chinese localization team. I assume if it's removed there, it's removed everywhere.

I bought the first one, guess I won't be buying this one, at least not on a Sony platform. This is just sad. I feel bad for the people working on these games.

So, Sony does not only targets the Western releases of the games that will appear on their platform, they will try to strongarm Eastern developers to kowtow their line in Asia as well?!

Just because non-online PC gaming does not have a stronghold there?

That is indeed a scammy move.

One I hope bites them in the ass.

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

Before I say anything else, tell me what you mean by "Safe Harbor"? You keep bringing it up, so I'm curious just what you mean by it in terms of freedom of speech.

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (a common name for Title V of the Telecommunications Act of 1996) is a landmark piece of Internetlegislation in the United States, codified at 47 U.S.C. § 230. Section 230(c)(1) provides immunity from liability for providers and users of an "interactive computer service" who publish information provided by third-party users:

No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.​

-wiki

They are immune from liability for content posted on their platform.

IF they lose this, the vast draconian policing would cost them an arm and a leg, and such draconian policies would drive most of their users away.

many amoung the youth have already abandoned facebook and even uninstalled the facebook app from their phone, if they became even more draconian they'd lose practically their entire base.

 

[Vlaphor]

They are immune from liability for content posted on their platform.

IF they lose this, the vast draconian policing would cost them an arm and a leg, and such draconian policies would drive most of their users away.

many amoung the youth have already abandoned facebook and even uninstalled the facebook app from their phone, if they became even more draconian they'd lose practically their entire base.

That is only for legal protections. I'm talking about those who choose to boycott a service (again, which many people here are talking about doing with Sony) or protest against one. You can't make a law that says you have to keep someone on your staff or continue hosting content that people find repulsive. The government can't charge you with anything for what you have on your service, but they can't punish you for firing someone who is toxic enough to drive away your customers.

 

[SLoWMoTIoN]

So, Sony does not only targets the Western releases of the games that will appear on their platform, they will try to strongarm Eastern developers to kowtow their line in Asia as well?!

Just because non-online PC gaming does not have a stronghold there?

That is indeed a scammy move.

One I hope bites them in the ass.

Sony's in full censorship those gamergate nuts were on to something maybe.

 

[The Cartographer]

The keyword is it looks like little girls, which is unacceptable in the western society.

What a time to be alive where people rage over their hentai games disappearing in public. It’s almost like openly talk about porn in public.

The fuck are you on about?
At least check the comparison images of this whole shitstorm before coming here and blabbering your tired moralistic stuff.
And just we're clear, these games are not even eroge so can it with the ''hentai games'', you're being obnoxious.

 

[Danjin44]

The fuck are you on about?
At least check the comparison images of this whole shitstorm before coming here and blabbering your tired moralistic stuff.
And just we're clear, these games are not even eroge so can it with the ''hentai games'', you're being obnoxious.

Didn't you know? When a game has anime artsyle it automatically makes it "hentai games". When first Catherine came out a lot of people also considered that game as "hentai games" even tho the game has no nudity or sex. Games like Mass Effect has full blown sex but no one calls that game "porn game" because it has realistic graphics.

 

[Barakov]

 

[CatCouch]

So, Sony does not only targets the Western releases of the games that will appear on their platform, they will try to strongarm Eastern developers to kowtow their line in Asia as well?!

Just because non-online PC gaming does not have a stronghold there?

That is indeed a scammy move.

One I hope bites them in the ass.

I'm seriously thinking of moving to PC and buying all games on that and the Switch when available.

I watched Appabends video about the decline of the Japanese console market and the untapped potential for PC there. Sony's new "to hell with the Japanese" policies are so egregious I think they might literally be trying to purge the games I buy. I think if Sony thought they could get away with it they'd block DOA and SoulCalibur, too.

With Nintendo I had a real struggle as I loved Fire Emblem but it was censored. I still wanted to play Mario games, though. With Sony, I don't buy their western games. I have no interest. I didn't buy God of War or Spider-Man. I also didn't buy big western games like Red Dead Redemption or even GTA5. I don't really care much for western games. I care for games with sexuality and romance. Those games seem to be dead, even Mass Effect/Dragon Age stye games. All gone.

I guess it's time to make a decision. I want to give Sony the benefit of the doubt and see if they clarify what the hell they are doing, especially since Shawn Layden just said Sony would communicate more, but I feel this is an intentional, calculated, and quite malicious move.

Maybe DOA6 should be my goal. Get a PC ready for gaming in time for it!

 

[CatCouch]

Didn't you know? When a game has anime artsyle it automatically makes it "hentai games". When first Catherine came out a lot of people also considered that game as "hentai games" even tho the game has no nudity or sex. Games like Mass Effect has full blown sex but no one calls that game "porn game" because it has realistic graphics.

I remember Fox calling the Xbox the "Sexbox" over Mass Effect. Unfortunately, it seems games like Mass Effect are going down, too. Very few games recently have romance and sex as options in them. I loved when romance was a big part of these games and I could spend hours reading about romance speculation before the games came out. Does that happen anymore? AC Odyssey has a little bit of that but it seems trends are to knock down any sex stuff. Gaming is just one big fight year round to me now...