Sony apologizes about Manchester Cathedral ... again

Oh give me a break! What a bunch of crap. I don't see why Sony should need to apologize for anything—it's absolutely silly.

Well, if money was exchanged, I can see all sorts of frivolous lawsuits forthcoming.

I haven't played Resistance: Fall of Man, but from what I've heard, the game has you defending the church from aliens. Am I right about that?

Because if I am, I don't understand how a church could possibly be insulted at a game portraying the defense of a church, which makes me conclude that they're in it for the money, not an apology.

Completely under the table. No way the Church was just going to back down so easily after getting the Prime Minister involved and appealing to Japan.

"sacred digital guidelines"

God help us...

Give the church a break, they need money to pay off their child-molestation cases.

I heard Sony was going to apologize by offering the church its choice of goat entrails.

Also later Sony will hire an urban marketing firm to spray paint "sorry Jesus Sony is awesome!" on the side of the church.

That should go over well..


All jokes aside I think too big a deal was made of all this. It's not like the game makes the church responsible or is making some "lol churchez = alienz" comment.

Maybe after churches start paying taxes they should complain like they're a business.

"sacred digital guidelines"

am I hearing this right? someone is MORE of a nut than Mr Thompson? Where is this world coming to?

if this were a mosque, i'm sure some people would have lost their lives. i guess sony doesn't consider radical church of englanders a big enough threat. but just from a legal standpoint they should have goten permission. i guess it's their right to decide how their church is portrayed.

@3

Yup, that's pretty much exactly it. It's not even big part of the game. You basically sweep through the church in part of a level and clear out all the aliens inside. That's it. Essentially you are saving the chuch. That's what makes this whole thing so stupid. The church isn't being portrayed in a negative fashion at all. And Resistance if far, far from being a "bloodthirsty" game. Yet it has been called that several times in the media duringthis whole fiasco.

This crap just continues to trickle down, first politicians became so castrated they can't even have a thought without six polls, now it's trickled down to corporations that are also becoming afraid of their own shadows. I just wish someone somewhere would give an enormous fuck you to whoever the next jackass is that is "offended" by something like this.

America, europe, japan, EVERYONE, GROW A SET!!!

Religion can be such a joke sometimes...

And no Im not anti-religious.

"We're Sorry religious people, however if you've noticed the church has stopped asking for the game to be taken off shelves hence we've paid the church a large cash sum and we're all happy-happy so long we just give our appologies and look the remorseful bad guys of the situation."
"Thank you Sony, your money will go back to funding protection for peadophile preasts. Here's some digital guidelines which no one will pay any notice of but we have to make it look like we haven't just caved in from the money Sony has thrown at us. The End."

I don't think Jesus would mind us killing alien invaders in a Church to save it and all of humanity... those people he kinda got nailed to a cross and slowly died for.

Aww f*ck... Sony better hope the Chimeran home world doesnt get a hold of Resistance FoM; they would sue their asses off.

I think the church is relatively justified in their opinion. Their religion may not be portrayed in a negative light, but they're still entitled to not want to be the site of an alien shooting game, even if the building is a landmark of sorts. Consider if someone made a "Def Jam Xtreme Christianity: Props To Jesus In His Home Court" taking place in large churches across the world, and you got to play as any rapper who ever thanked God in his lyrics.

@Trocke

If the church didn't immediately demand money for this, I might agree with you.

The bottom line is that the church's own actions are making them look much worse than any game ever did. Whether or not that clears the game of any wrongdoing... well, that depends more on the lawyers, and whether or not a church is open game for artistic interpretation.

@Tricke

Major differences though...

-This is an alternate history where the Manchester Cathedral was serving a role as a Field Hospital. A not uncommon practice during wartimes. And so the initial goal was to regroup at the field hospital.

-When you enter, the hospital/church had been abandoned. All the pews were removed for medical equipment. Your character is stuck questioning what the hell happened as the crawlers surge forward.

-Mission changes to simply escaping the building. So you charge through the church. Possibly one of the shortest sequences of the game. In a 10 hour game, this entire sequence took less than 10 minutes and even with the crawlers, never breached 100 enemies. From my play experience.

Despite this, the media made drastic misrepresentations of the sequence to channel up controversy. This is including the phrases "you kill hundreds of the opposing force" while conveniently negating the fact that the opposing force is a monsterous invasionary force (not even human) that has managed to wipe out over 99% of Europe in a matter of days.

@sheppy

By your account, the gameplay in the church doesn't sound indulgent. It's a quick segment, and the church is used as it logically would in an invasion scenario -- thank you for providing that context.

The larger issue, then, appears to be any media coverage that tries to exaggerate what goes on in Manchester. Shooters are bloody by nature, but that doesn't make 100% of their content a violent orgy. Of course, explain that to a layperson without taking 10 minutes to sort out the details. "What? It's called Fall of Man, and you're shooting aliens, and part of it is in a CHURCH?" Even if all journalists did was report the straight facts on this, people would read into the details to twist their own version of the story.

I still think the church is entitled to ask, "no shooters with us in them please," but asking for compensatory money (I agree with Anam here) is going too far. It ought to be enough to make in-game exposure a matter of permission, same as what filmmakers have to deal with.

@Trocke

Personally, I feel the way they acted was shameful, the media sided with them WITHOUT EVEN REMOTELY DECENT RESEARCH, and all they wanted was a payout.

Let's just put it this way, before they approached Sony about this issue, they approached the media. They said the context of the game is relevant to the current gun problems in Manchester despite the fact that the only REALITY based gun hasn't seen action in Manchester for roughly 60+ years. And they conveniently avoided what the sequence was in the context.

Nope, their first demands were pretty much saying "Sony, talk to us on Monday so you can ban your game and give us monies" on a Friday evening.

Sony talked to them and while going through negotiations, they urged the people of JAPAN to their side since Sony was a Japanese company and all and Christianity in the land of the rising sun isn't nothing more than mythology to base anime and RPGs off of.

And even as they got their apology, they said "Yes, yes, well that's fine. Where's our money?"

Meanwhile, with Sony bowing down from this, what happens to all those games that featured the World Trade Center in their backgrounds. That isn't public property either. What about the many times I've seen the Arch in St. Louis in games? And let's not forget GTA.

What this lawsuit has done is officially opened a door for a bunch of money hungry people. Remember when Las Vegas wanted cashito from Rainbow Six because they didn't want a city founded by the mafia to suddenly become associated with terrorism instead of gambling, booze, and whores? A year ago, that was rightfully told to fuck off. Thanks to the media painting Resistance as murder porn in a church, Sony had to bow out and now the previous position of "fuck off" has been compromised.

Hmm, no GodisaMyth yet... weird.

As for the whole affair, well I still think it was silly for the Church of England to raise their pitchforks on this issue. Of course I'm not Protestant so... dunno?

Sony really is taking a PR beating huh?

koopaknight, they are the easy target. They had the goat fiasco and now this. Did the news ever apologize for falsely reporting that? Nope. So in many a Europian mind, Sony sacrifices goats... they could ill afford gun orgies in churches as well.

People have short memories, certain groups asked for one of the Hitman titles to be pulled because of one of the locations in the game. I don't think anything ever came of it.

Sony should have pointed to the "all similarities to..." disclaimer that most movies and games have and gone back to trying to figure out how to get some of their exclusives back.

What I'm wondering is if owners of other famous landmarks will now be filling similar complaints? Is it sufficient to just change the name? Did any casino in Las Vegas complain when Rainbow Six: Vegas came out? I know they are not called the same but everyone can tell what casinos they are. What about all those WWII shooters that use real landmarks as well?

@sheppy:

My point exactly, this opens the door for any location to deny a digital image. Washington D.C, one of the most used locations ever, there are like what, 4 or 5 games due to be released that either take place in DC or depict DC being nuked. Now if suddenly the American government made a fuss about this and cited terrorist implications people would be up in arms, but it would be a comparable complaint and sony is getting dangerously close to backing themselves and possible the industry into a corner.

Don't get me wrong, this happened to Sony, but it could have happened to anyone with probably the same reaction.

Although I kinda wish they would have got sued, lost, and then hard to port Resistance to the 360 to recoup the lost... heh.

(That's in jest, I just want to play the game!)

Welp, what can we do about it, right shep? The news is more about rating than the truth nowadays. Sad really... Nintendo's the only one really getting any kind of pass from the media this gen. Guess it's because they have yet to screw themselves over royally.

Now that I think about it, I seem to remember at least -one- church/cemetary shootout in every WW2 shooter I've ever played and no one raised the alarm then. Then again, they were pretty generic and this time was specific, and a cathedral no less.

*EuropEan*
(Sorry, had to get that one out.)

Ahh the media, dragging civilization a little closer to the brink of extinction every day of their miserable lives.

You know it's gonna get to a point where we can't even take a picture without getting the permission of whatever virus is floating through the air at the time.

All I gotta say is..

Who the fuck cares! *thumbs up*

Zack, thank you, now I dont have to say it. But you know what, your wrong. They just moved the priests to different churches without warning anyone in that community that he touches little kids. Yeah, make the pope a saint! He moves molesters around to locations where they can rape more kids.

So... how about in The Darkness, where you are summoning demons in a church to help you kill police officers? Is that ok because it's not a specific church, just some random one in NY?

er original War of the Worlds

Church

Aliens

Problem?? so it's allowed in film but not games...

Old people.

Mccomber.
In response to your question its more the fact that it is a specific landmark/property and organizations are legally allowed to designate how other organizations may use their property (the content in Darkness doesn't defame any specific property). While their is very little precedent set so far for digital rights usage I would imagine that since sony is backing down instead of pulling out thier lawyers that they assume they would have some sort of rights infringement.

"Who the fuck cares!" - God

LOL

Hey guyz! lets bash religoin cause wer so overprotective about video gamez! kekekek!

I'd tell the Church to goto Hell. Screw them any every other group who gets offended. People need to grow up and relise the difference between real life and a game or movie. I am sick of the minority always getting their way of the rest of society. I say everyone who gets upset can goto Hell and I'll see them there.

I'll have to agree with sheppy on this one, if any remuneration was sought on the Church of England's behalf, then just about any place that has been the setting in a video game is subject to frivilous lawsuits, which, considering the fact I work at a lawfirm, is good news!

Still, it could fall under the "freedom of speech" umbrella, especially since video games could be considered "art". Although that may only apply within the US. But I think the Church of England is a bit out of line, and that Sony has done what's beyond necessary to ameliorate the problem.

Oh bloody f*** off CoE. This is the same bloody church who blame gays for the recent floodings in Britain.

The "church" is behind some of the most bloody and horrible acts in history. Shooting aliens is one of the least violent acts done in a church.

This is pathetic. Sony should hold their ground against these religious zealots. It is simple. The video game is set in Manchester and there happens to be a church there so it is used as a landmark in the game. If the Church of England doesn't like it, then they shouldn't buy the goddamn game!

The actual article says the church wanted a donation to community groups against gun violence - not a donation to them. RTFA is the phrase I believe. Quoting:

""We asked Sony to make a substantial donation to community groups nominated by the Cathedral. They have refused to do this," he said, referring the church's education department, which works to fight gun violence in Manchester."

The article itself can be read here http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/B/BRITAIN_CATHEDRAL_SONY?SITE=MOCOD&SECTION=BUSINESS&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2007-06-13-16-59-03.

And I have to agree with a previous poster that if this was a synagogue or mosque the issue would be taken much more seriously. What if the battle took place on Temple Mount? Christians have as much right to have their places of religion respected as Jews or Muslims.