Soundtrack Central The best classic game music and more

    Pages: 1

avatar! Jun 12, 2007 … index.html

Well, Sony may have been a bit brash in not considering people's feelings (what with all the gun violence), but then again, this IS the Church we're talking about... and yeah, I guess I have a natural distrust for politics and religion! Anyway, I think things are being blown out of proportion as always, but it's an amusing read smile  I'm curious what the English press is saying about this (if anything).



Ramza Jun 12, 2007

The media spin on this is making me nauseous. Headlines like "church wants cash" really bug me. I don't think this is a matter of people trying to make cash grabs. I think it's Sony being, as you said, brash and insensitive.

The Manchester church is way out of its league if they think they can make Sony 1) pull a game from shelves, 2) EDIT a game in its entirety, or 3) WIN against Sony in a law suit. But all because these were what they spoke of, it doesn't make the church some evil money-hungry entity. They're just naive about the industry.

And honestly, if I lived in Manchester, I'd probably be disturbed by this game's content as well.


Jay Jun 12, 2007

Yeah because fighting aliens might be pretty close to the bone.

The coverage over here is ridiculous. BBC citing hundreds of 'people' being killed in the game and then showing awful YouTube footage that shows nothing but gunfire. No mention of it being, you know, fiction.

The church clearly don't have a legal leg to stand on. If they did, the initial reports would have been more than 'they're thinking of writing a letter' or then later, 'they're thrashing out a letter'. They'd have written a letter. To their lawyers. They're just hoping turing it into a media circus will give them public opinion and it won't need to be tested in court.

Money-grabbing? Yeah, probably. But I think more attention-grabbing.

raynebc Jun 12, 2007

I think Sony is way out of line depicting bloodbaths in a church that does everything it can to prevent such a thing.  Sony can dress it up however they like, but textured-3D representations of the inside of the church can probably pass for "photographic likeness" in court.  Sony could stiff the church if they like, but they would rather not get all that bad press.  Their image is more important to them than what amounts to a handful of peanuts.

Jay Jun 12, 2007

Everything it can to prevent such a thing? Firstly, the history of the church is not one without blood. Secondly, my firstly doesn't even matter because the blood in question is science fiction alien blood not remotely in any way associated with real life (unless you believe aliens walk among us). It's not GTA in a church.

It's a game. Not an instruction manual on how to live your life.

Ryu Jun 12, 2007

Does this fall under fair use?  The White House, WTC, Pentagon, Vatican, etc are all fair game for books, movies, tv shows, music, and games---there is nothing that they can do, especially outside of the UK.

Sony shouldn't donate one cent.  Well, maybe to SETI... they are sending the wrong message to our soon-to-be conquerers from beyond the moon; a message for which they need to correct and apologize.

All hail, Kodos!

Schala Jun 12, 2007

As a member of the media, I find the whole thing pretty funny.

Bernhardt Jun 13, 2007 (edited Jun 13, 2007)

Well, you have to keep in mind, the British are quite squeamish about gun violence.

There was massacre that happened in Britain, long before Columbine, that was far more bloody. Don't know all that details, but that's when they banned guns in the country.

They've a right to be squeamish about it.


Other than that, we really have a lot of paranoid activists running around today, questioning the overall stability of the minds of the general public. I mean, what makes them think that [dot-dot-dot] person is going to shoot up [dot-dot-dot] place? Those activists need to be asked, "Would you shoot up [dot-dot-dot] place?" Their own stablity really needs to be questioned. -_-;

h3 Jun 13, 2007

What is with this ridiculous, childish Sony hate splattered here?

The game was developed by Insomniac; who developed the Rachet and Clank games. It has nothing to do with Sony in terms of content - unless you guys are thinking that Sony should exercise publisher power to alter developer content. You think an independent developer like Insomniac will take that?

Ridiculous responses here.

Ryu Jun 14, 2007

^  I don't get exactly to whom this comment is directed.

Jay Jun 14, 2007

Neither do I.

Seems nobody is concerned with actually telling it like it is. From this report - … edral_sony

"The new PlayStation 3 game, "Resistance: Fall of Man," involves a virtual shootout between rival gunmen with hundreds of people killed inside the cathedral."

If they can't report the Church of England getting their knickers in a twist over a game without lying spin, just think what that means for the stories that actually matter.

TerraEpon Jun 14, 2007

I hate it when people use the term "domnation" when it's not. Ugh.


Ashley Winchester Jun 14, 2007

TerraEpon wrote:

I hate it when people use the term "domnation" when it's not. Ugh.

True that. It's more like hush money if anything.

Anyways, I think replicating the church in the game was in bad taste; I mean it's obvious Sony didn't ask permission because once they disclosed the details on how it would have been used in the game the church would have said no even if they where to reciceve a "donation."

Still, is having one less FPS (even a high selling one like Resistence) on the shelves resolve anything? The minute you tell the puplic they can have something (a game, a scene) the more they want it - the whole "forbidden fruit" angle thats been around since biblical times - and another company would come along with something bigger and badder regardless. Becuase of this, removing Resistence from shelves (which would never happen anyway) would really have the opposite outcome the church wishes to achive.

Ryu Jun 14, 2007 (edited Jun 14, 2007)

I don't know UK law, but I don't see how this suit could fly in the US.  Good reason that Insomniac/Sony didn't look for permission is that they usually don't ask permission for 'landmarks'.  The argument that just because it is a religious building holds absolutely no special merit.  They should be honored that their church has been immortalized; I'm certain worldwide more people are visiting it digitally (to save the world no less!) than they ever will in real life (to save their soul, allegedly).

    Pages: 1

Board footer

Forums powered by FluxBB