Slashdot Mirror
Sony Cracks Down On Sexually Explicit Content In Games (engadget.com)
Slashdot reader xavdeman writes: Hot on the heels of its announcement of the specifications of the next PlayStation, Sony has revealed a new crackdown on explicit content. Citing "the rise of the #MeToo movement" and a concern of "legal and social action" in the USA, Sony has said it wants to address concerns about the depiction of women in video games playable on its platform as well as protect children's "sound growth and development." The new rules were reportedly already responsible for puritan cutscene alterations in the Western PS4 release of the multi-platform title Devil May Cry 5, where lens flares were used to cover up partial nudity.
Except now it's done by the "liberals". But essentially, it's back to a puritan state with enhanced surveillance technology.
This completely dismisses the parental responsibility to use ESRB ratings. Kids with shitty parents who ignore the ratings aren't going to be saved because Sony said "no boobs" to developers.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Men: "dang, geralt is ripped, i wish i looked like him. I'll do trial of the grasses (read as: hit the gym) and stop stuffing my fat fucking face")
Women*: "that outfit is too skimpy, and it sets unrealistic standards for women's bodies. Hey, mcdonalds sounds good, i haven't ate in 2 hours"
*the type who bitch about video games and how women are depicted, while COMPLETELY missing that men are idealized in these games too. Oh, and somehow missing that they are god damn works of fiction. If you wanted to see average, chunky people just go outside and hang out at bus stops or the local K-mart.
However, if Sony doesn't have the infrastructure and procedures in place to protect children as they'd like and still offer the material, it's up to them to remove it.
You almost had it. Here:
However, if Sony doesn't have the infrastructure and procedures in place to protect children as they'd like and still offer the material, it's up to [[THE PARENTS]] to remove it [[from their children's reach]]
>>> Citing "the rise of the #MeToo movement" and a concern of "legal and social action" in the USA ...
Because no woman, anywhere in the USA, also enjoys nudity and sex. /s
Because a girl or guy in a skimpy outfit vs not skimpy outfit while impaling another character with their sword is the same as a fist pounding someone's ass. Thanks for the education. Parental control is exactly that. PARENTS CONTROLLING THEIR KIDS. Not the media being controlled by SJW or any other knee jerking triggered idiot. This is simply the eradication of provocative material for the mistaken attempt at controlling sexual behavior or misbehavior as defined by a minority of religious zealots. It's not up for Sony to remove or censor it. It's up to you to not buy the game for their kid if you find it offensive. Why don't we just go ahead and whitewash all material. Why is graphical material always the target? What is in pictures or moving pictures that people trigger so easily when written word is rarely (but still) banned. A ton of females read very graphical sexual novels but we're supposed to believe they are harmed or feel ashamed because some other girls decide to be depicted showing their skin/human shape. It's bullshit. Animals go naked every day with their schlongs hanging out and hump each other in front of each other. We're the only species to cry about it when we even see a glimpse of it. Like we're some precious frigging fragile beings that can't handle our own breeding/hormonal stimulation from visuals.
That's power-fantasy objectification though, not sexual objectification.
Ask yourself (better yet, ask your women friends) - are Conan the Barbarian, Superman, etc. characters created for men to fantasize about being, or for women to fantasize about fucking? Then ask yourself the same (gender-flipped) question about the women portrayed in the same medium.
The two fantasies tend to be very different, and you only need to look at the target audience (and gender of the character designers) to get a pretty good idea which it is.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
So I can still pull my enemies spine out though their neck? :D
Will I still be able to spend a ton of money on "loot boxes" after having paid for the game?
I am guessing we are still cool with violence and gambling, just not a bit of tits and asses on display.
Is it unheard of for women wanting to be what men want to look at? (not that they'd ever admit to it.)
i'd wager basketball shorts and a loose fitting T-shirt are JUST as comfortable as yoga pants and a halter top.
(inb4 weak ass incel comments.)
You actually enjoy censored games?
I'll stick wihh my "pc elitism" then, you enjoy your censored nanny box
To protect children's "sound growth and development" Sony is going to censor content deemed to be too sexy on their Playstation platform.
While, at the same time, titles with a violence level right off the charts like:
Hitman
Grand Theft Auto
Mortal Kombat
Manhunt
seem to be just fine for the same audience ?
( Good thing Timmy can't see any video game skin, imagine the mental trauma it would cause. Now go eviscerate that Dark Elf ! They deserve it ! :| )
Both Violence / Gore and Sexual Themes are designed for the Mature Audiences ( hence the M rating ).
If you really want to protect children's "sound growth and development", be a fucking parent.
Understand what the M rating is and make the decision to let your kids play it or not.
If you're too lazy to actually be a parent, perhaps you shouldn't engage in activities that create the conditions where you become one in the first place.
I think that our culture has finally reached the point, at least on a corporate and governmental and celebrity level (though not on an average family unit level), where the left is much more concerned with and vocal about slut shaming and other assorted neopuritan bullshit.
The fact that they do it under the guise is protecting women just makes it all the more reprehensible. I listen to self-identifying progress/"liberal" women make public statements about how much they regret doing nude scenes (Yeardley Smith,voice of Lisa Simpson) or participating in wet T-Shirt contest (Kristen Schaal) earlier in their lives because years later they realized that it degrades and objectifies women and I'm like... who is more going to listen to a statement like that and feel more ashamed? The millions of men who see such things and smiled? Or the millions of women who have participated in such things and smiled?
It's straight up slut shaming and they try to disguise it by pretending that really they're slut shaming men, but really women are far more likely to feel bad about this criticism they're hearing.
It is a normal, typical aspect of female sexuality to enjoy showing off. It's not a male conspiracy; it's a perfectly natural inclination (that is frequently encouraged by men, yes.) And if you tell them they're making objects out of themselves when they do that, you're a slut shaming neo-puritan asshole.
This needs to be pointed out more frequently.
I'll tell you a shocking secret. The sexy women in videogames are made up are not real!
But pixels are people too.
That's the punchline here. It's not the religious right that gets worked up over tits, it's the alleged liberal left that is.
Please stop the world, I want to get off.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Given that many female video game characters are created by women your point is wrong.
Given that many female video game characters are enjoyed and welcomed by women your point is wrong.
Given that sexy women in video games are supposedly taboo yet are no more sexualised than the apparently perfectly acceptable male characters in the same fucking games, your point is wrong.
It's just people determined to take offence getting irate that they're not in control of someone else's hobby. Fuck them.