Separation of Church and Games?

A

admin

Audioholics Robot
Staff member
Not since the Opie and Anthony debacle has the church been so up in arms over an apparent desecration of it's buildings. The Church of England asked Sony to apologize and withdraw Resistance: Fall of Man, for its graphic gunplay sequences which take place in a British cathedral. I believe the term utilized was "virtual desecration." Taking it a step further, the Anglican Church pushed to have Sony contribute financially to help curb gun violence in Manchester by giving to the Cathedral.


Discuss "Separation of Church and Games?" here. Read the article.
 
avaserfi

avaserfi

Audioholic Ninja
I guess I have a pretty strong view on situations like these. People need to realize video games, movies, music etc... are not real life and should treat it as such. Even though the game takes place in real life towns and yes cathedrals that does not mean Sony or insomniac (the developer) has done anything wrong here. Fantasy is fantasy.

Anyone who is sick enough to actually hurt someone because of what they saw/did in a video game or some other form of entertainment was more likely than not unstable to begin with and would have found another source of "inspiration."

Freedom of speech is an extremely important thing, especially in a country who is supposedly based around it yet is having it quashed left and right by sources such as the government. Sony will probably pay the church off, which is more likely than not exactly what they wanted in the first place, just to make it look like they did the right thing but even that is more than should be done in my opinion.
 
W

westcott

Audioholic General
This incident is a sad reflection of our society today. One should not have to tell someone that certain things just are not in good taste and should be avoided. A kind of gentleman's rule must apply and one should not have to pass legislation to curb such poor judgment. Just because it is not illegal does not make it right.

Am I a religous zealot. By no means but I do respect others and their beliefs no matter what my personal feelings are. Its just common sense.
 
GlocksRock

GlocksRock

Audioholic Spartan
They probably shouldn't have used something that so closely resembles a real cathederal, but it's still just a video game.
 
avaserfi

avaserfi

Audioholic Ninja
The problem video game creators face especially with newer systems is everyone screams for more realism and this is where it gets them with a happy user base but there is always someone who won't be happy.
 
Clint DeBoer

Clint DeBoer

Banned
The very reason we clamour for personal responsibility on the part of these companies is so that we don't legislate stuff like this that should be more or less common decency and sense...
 
Adam

Adam

Audioholic Jedi
"It's just a video game." "It's not real life." That gets thrown around a lot, but as a society we still need to draw the line somewhere. Not everyone draws that line in the same place, though, so we have discussions like this. I think that including violence in a place of worship is in bad taste. Many people consider those locations sacred, and to them it's a very big deal to depict them in the manner used in Sony's game.

Would you support the rights of a company to sell a game like RapeFest 2000 that superimposed an image of your mother's bloodied face on one of the victims? Hey, it's just a video game...
 
avaserfi

avaserfi

Audioholic Ninja
Maybe I am being a little of an idealist here but shouldn't the consumers choose? These companies should have the right to produce whatever they want no matter how vulgar or indecent and shouldn't consumers pick what they buy. If a game is to violent it will be rated so and then it is parental responsibility to filter this so it does not get to their children.

While I understand why some people might be upset due to the graphic nature of this game and its real life locations they should simply not buy it.

We should see what Sony's press release says over the weekend they made a short statement saying they were under the impression that they had done everything necessary to use the locations used because the church was mad that they did not have expressed permission. Sony also said they would be releasing more in depth information today.

edit: One thing to note is that there has been violence portrayed in movies and video games that have taken places in churches as well as other holy areas the problem is this time it angered the right people and enough of them most likely because of the linking of the world (the church found out via videos on you tube).

Also, that line has been drawn to an extent. When was the last time an Adult rated game was published on a major console? Even GTA: Vice Cities was pulled off the shelves until the adult rating was reduced down to teen.
 
Last edited:
A

angstadt530

Audioholic
I'm not sure how I feel on this matter. I'm a pretty strong Christian, but I also enjoy playing a good FPS (yea Halo!). Churches have been used in video games and movies in the past as 'battlegrounds', and to me it adds a bit of interesting variety to the levels. As I have not played Resistance, I took a brief look at the level being played on YouTube. From what I saw, there is no encouraged destruction of the cathedral; it is there merely for a unique level design and a bit of realism. The main goal is surviving! (One could even argue players are defending the church...)

The problem that I can understand, however, is the issue of this being an actual place, apparently modeled pretty accurately. For a game as violent as this, I can see why it would have been a good idea for Sony to get permission to use this place as a battleground. I think the bigger issue, though, is not the fact that it is a church, but they used the interior design without permission. Is there any law governing that?

So, my final opinion to conclude this brainstorm? Churches used as stages in games are ok in my book, but if developers are going to design a replica of a place of worship--or any place for that matter--they should use a little more discretion.
 
krzywica

krzywica

Audioholic Samurai
The problem is when institutions and governments start making decisions for the general public. Putting tags on things that are "socially acceptible" and things that are not. This is a scary thing. Not having the option to chose? Who wants that? Like avaserfi said, if you want to buy it then great, if not, then thats great too. But making a cookie cutter mold of rules and regulations, then saying "hey this is just right for everyone" that just doesn't work. Because whats wrong for you may not be wrong in my eyes and vice versa.
 
krzywica

krzywica

Audioholic Samurai
I'm not sure how I feel on this matter. I'm a pretty strong Christian, but I also enjoy playing a good FPS (yea Halo!). Churches have been used in video games and movies in the past as 'battlegrounds', and to me it adds a bit of interesting variety to the levels. As I have not played Resistance, I took a brief look at the level being played on YouTube. From what I saw, there is no encouraged destruction of the cathedral; it is there merely for a unique level design and a bit of realism. The main goal is surviving! (One could even argue players are defending the church...)

The problem that I can understand, however, is the issue of this being an actual place, apparently modeled pretty accurately. For a game as violent as this, I can see why it would have been a good idea for Sony to get permission to use this place as a battleground. I think the bigger issue, though, is not the fact that it is a church, but they used the interior design without permission. Is there any law governing that?

So, my final opinion to conclude this brainstorm? Churches used as stages in games are ok in my book, but if developers are going to design a replica of a place of worship--or any place for that matter--they should use a little more discretion.
I can see where you are coming from with this one. And I agree they should ask permission before using somewhere like that for an exact model. I mean what about sports games? Developers have to pay loyalties to the NFL, NBA, NASCAR, and what have you to use the stadium models and what not. So why not pay royalties for a notional monument?
 
avaserfi

avaserfi

Audioholic Ninja
Thats the thing, it shouldn't, but people make it into a problem then people have to apologize for something they aren't really sorry for.

Haven't you ever argued with a woman! Its the same idea... ;)
 
D

davo

Full Audioholic
I don't really see what "the church" is whining about.

They have supported more than their fair share of bloodshed on both sides of any war in history.

Go figure!!
 
mikeyj92

mikeyj92

Full Audioholic
Ahhh, The Church.

Its hypocrisy knows no bounds.

Has any other subject been the driving force (the righteous cause!) behind more bloodshed in the history of the world?

This is laughable to me.
 
thejumbo

thejumbo

Audiophyte
What they are doing is sickening - the church, NOT Sony, that is.

I feel that this is another way for the church to try and leverage their already too-strong power over the public to insight public outcry over nothing more than a realistic digital reproduction of a building. They used no photos in the game footage, and it is all "fake", for lack of a better term. Legally, the church has no recourse against Sony, and this is clearly "fair use".

The "moral" issue is where I have the biggest issue. The church (and some of the posters here) feel that since this building in real life is a place of worship for some, that Sony has some moral obligation to those worshipers. I say bollocks. Sony has designed a first person shooting game using the plot of a completely alternate reality and utilizing realistic surroundings to immerse the player. The game is rated Adult (Mature), and as such, is not meant for ALL.

Why does the church feel that they have any right to determine what is right for ME in my gaming experience. If I feel that Sony has made a mistake, I won't buy it. Personal choice is a beautiful thing, and since Sony has all of its legal bases covered, it is up to me as an individual to determine what is morally acceptable to me when it comes to my gaming choices. And that is the biggest issue with the church, in this case and many others - they are seeking to make peoples' minds up for them.

Morals and ethics are individual preconceptions, should be treated as such.
 
E

Evil-Rage

Audiophyte
I'm sorry, but... WHAT?

You're kidding me, right? Some of you are actually buying into this? Here, let me give you three good reasons right now why this is simple and clear BS.

Dogma
End Of Days
Constantine

These all have plenty of violence and assorted blasphemy inside church walls. Yet I don't see the church looking with greedy eyes at the movie industry, accusing THEM of any kind of desecration, virtual or otherwise (no doubt at least some of these were shot in or around actual churches...)

This is a cheap shot at the video game industry, and it's completely and totally without merit. If they want to pull copies of Resistance off shelves (I'd claim 1st amendment rights but this particular article refers to a church in England) then they'd damn well better do it across the board, for all other types of media, too. Hell, why not force the music labels to stop selling CDs that blaspheme, too?

Oh, right. Because that would be illegal, not to mention a complete infringement on the artists' rights. Freedom of expression and all that. They have that in England too, don't they?

It's time for the war against video games to end. The media, the church and the government need to find another scapegoat for all the violence that's taking place these days. If they wanted to find the truth, all they'd have to do is look in the mirror...
 
D

davo

Full Audioholic
But wait, they want more!

Really really pathetic.



Church wants more than apologies from Sony
Added on 17/06/2007.

So it appears the Church of England wants a little more than apologies from Sony in the Resistance: Fall of Man scandal. It received the following statements from David Reeve's, SCEE Vice President last Friday:

"Please understand that Resistance: Fall of Man is a work of science fiction…

We do not accept that there is any connection between contemporary issues of 21st century Manchester and a work of science fiction in which a fictitious 1950’s Britain is under attack by aliens…

It was not our intention to cause offense by using a representation of Manchester Cathedral in chapter 8 of the work. If we have done so we sincerely apologize.

In conclusion we note that you are consulting lawyers. We confirm that it is our policy to seek all necessary permissions for our products and services, and we believe with this particular work we have done so."

The Church has now replied:

"We acknowledge the admission by Sony that the building in the game is Manchester Cathedral. We thank Sony for the apology they have made.

However, we do not move from the position that we are against violence and especially the gun violence seen in this portrayal of the Cathedral.

We are pleased that Sony wish to come and meet with us in Manchester as today we offered them such an invitation.

In the meeting with Sony we will discuss our outstanding demands, how this game came to be produced and where the images of the Cathedral came from."

Sounds like someone is itching for donations. Check back to see how this resolves.
The church wants their demands met?!?
 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top