[The News Bot]

The global release of a much-anticipated video game is delayed because of concerns it could offend Muslims.
More...

[Pecker]

There's no such thing as bad publicity.

They come out of this looking incredibly sensitive to the feelings of a minority.

Steve W

[ramalho]

Minority?they're part of the three largest monotheistic religions on the planet.Besides,the Bible has been ridiculed and made fun of for a very long time,so now It's the Alkoran's time:equal treatment,no favouritism. Furthermore, you should always be allowed to make fun of religion,be it yours or anyone else's'.

Don't mean to be controversial or insensitive,specially on a forum that has nothing to do with this,but let's be fair:How is a reference to the Alkoran in a game offensive,Isn't it kind of flattering to the religion in question?


wow,speak of the Devil:a bunch of Mormons are just at my door...must have offended someone "Up There".
Again,I meant no offense

[Dr Force]

The christian church was up in arms with Resistance Fall Of Man.......................did it get pulled??.......................................... .....no way

like everything in the world today, religion, sexual orientation, political correctness, health & safety........................................one big huge over reaction which ends up driving people to silence.

Shame, but fear is the new king and its caused by these sorts of examples.

There is offence to someone everywhere in every day walks of life and its how we react to them thats shapes the way we are. I think the world has become hyper sensitive and this video game is a typical example.

[thelurch]

Im surprised the Daily papers dont have muslim proof readers the rate this country is going!

Unfortunately this country has given up everything that once made it great.

But I think I can wait another 2 weeks!

[Pecker]

Originally Posted by ramalho

Minority?they're part of the three largest monotheistic religions on the planet.Besides,the Bible has been ridiculed and made fun of for a very long time,so now It's the Alkoran's time:equal treatment,no favouritism. Furthermore, you should always be allowed to make fun of religion,be it yours or anyone else's'.

Don't mean to be controversial or insensitive,specially on a forum that has nothing to do with this,but let's be fair:How is a reference to the Alkoran in a game offensive,Isn't it kind of flattering to the religion in question?


wow,speak of the Devil:a bunch of Mormons are just at my door...must have offended someone "Up There".
Again,I meant no offense

Who's banning anything?

Someone at a website pointed out it might be offensive, so they pulled it.

Setting the words of the Koran to music is forbidden in Islam - filming in Manchester Cathedral isn't.

If this had been a Pythonesque attempt to poke fun at the deficiencies of Islam, then it'd be wrong to ban it, or self-censor. But it was just an oversight.

Steve W

[David Mackenzie]

Seems more than a little ridiculous to me, but as an Atheist it's really nothing new...

[Fen Star]

Originally Posted by Pecker

Setting the words of the Koran to music is forbidden in Islam
Steve W

The Muslim that recorded the track two years ago didn't seem to think it was that forbidden, also i think you'll find you can still buy it on i-tunes.

seems to me more like a case of do as we say, not as we do....

[Sonic67]

Originally Posted by Dr Force

The christian church was up in arms with Resistance Fall Of Man.......................did it get pulled??.......................................... .....no way

Not really true. The Christian Church wasn't up in arms over it, Cathedral officials were because it was used in the game without permission. If you want to expand it wider you could go as far as the Church of England.

It didn't get pulled though Sony issued an apology and promised it wouldn't be done again. The Dean of the Cathedral did say, "We asked Sony to withdraw the game. They have refused to do this.

"We asked Sony to make a substantial donation to community groups nominated by the Cathedral. They have refused to do this.

"We also asked them to sign up to the Sacred Digital Guidelines. They have refused to do this."

BBC NEWS | England | Manchester | Sony 'sorry' over cathedral game

So maybe Sony should have done more. Perhaps a donation.

[Pecker]

Originally Posted by Fen Star

The Muslim that recorded the track two years ago didn't seem to think it was that forbidden, also i think you'll find you can still buy it on i-tunes.

seems to me more like a case of do as we say, not as we do....

I perhaps should have said "…to many Muslims". You get similar things in Christianity - to a Roman Catholic a statue of Jesus is holy, to a protestant it's a sin.

We seem to be missing something here. The music wasn't written for the game. The game has nothing to do with Islam – the makers just thought the music sounded nice - but they could have used any number of different pieces.

Now if the game were some sort of critique of Islam, then I think it would be wrong for Sony to censor the authors. But this is a totally different situation.

It would appear the music was chose because it sounded nice, without any intent to reference Islam or criticise it in any way. When the makers found out about the possible problems, they changed it.

That sounds good to me. That sounds like responsible members of society not wishing to offend a minority. BTW, Muslims are a minority measured both as a world community, or as a proportion of gamers.
It seems to me that the makers of the game set out to criticise no one - to upset no one - and that when they found that they'd chosen a piece of music by accident they changed it so they didn't upset anyone.

That they should be criticised for this by anyone is a sign of the deep anti-religious fundamentalism, thrown in with a spot of anti-Muslim/Asian racism, inherent in our society at the moment.

What people appear to be saying top the makers of the game in this thread is “Hey, you didn’t set out to upset anyone, but you did by accident, and you’re now wrong to put that right”.

Steve W

[Bald Monkey]

Originally Posted by David Mackenzie

Seems more than a little ridiculous to me, but as an Atheist it's really nothing new...

Indeed.

[Pecker]

Originally Posted by David Mackenzie

Seems more than a little ridiculous to me, but as an Atheist it's really nothing new...

The situation here is that someone has inadvertently done something which might upset others, so has put things right...

...and the atheists aren't happy.

But then again, being an agnostic who witnesses far more rabid fundamentalism from atheists than from theists, it's really nothing new...



Steve W

[David Mackenzie]

Originally Posted by Pecker

That they should be criticised for this by anyone is a sign of the deep anti-religious fundamentalism, thrown in with a spot of anti-Muslim/Asian racism, inherent in our society at the moment.

I think it's very important here to distinguish between racism and not respecting a religion.

I'm sure that there are anti-Muslim people out there who, simply put, are just racist. An irrational fear/hatred towards a group of people based solely on where they come from is clearly ridiculous.

Personally, I'm not racist in the slightest - if this had been Christians complaining about a game, I'd be saying the same thing. Although, had it been a complaint of that matter, I don't think we'd have seen thousands (millions) of optical discs being yanked from shelves and replaced.

But then again, being an agnostic who witnesses far more rabid fundamentalism from atheists than from theists, it's really nothing new...

I can imagine that atheists will be more vocal, yes. There are theists who have picked their religion for themselves, but from what I've seen, the majority hold beliefs which they expect automatic respect for simply due to the fact that they inherited them from their parents or their culture/surroundings. That is to say, their religion of "choice" is more often than not a coincidence. With that in mind, I can imagine why atheists, who have probably had to actively think through the norms imposed by their surroundings, would be more vocal (or more rabid, depending on your point of view )

[Sonic67]

Originally Posted by Pecker

It would appear the music was chose because it sounded nice, without any intent to reference Islam or criticise it in any way. When the makers found out about the possible problems, they changed it.

This is my understanding of it as well. The music is background music and will probably be a straight swap for something else and won't need a large re-write of code or much of a delay. With Resistance FOM either the whole section of the game would have had to have gone or some other building created or modelled which would have meant a large change.

If we are discussing games and religion we can also throw in Hitman 2.

CBBC Newsround | SCI TECH | Young Sikhs force changes to Hitman 2

[Pecker]

Originally Posted by David Mackenzie

I think it's very important here to distinguish between racism and not respecting a religion.

I'm sure that there are anti-Muslim people out there who, simply put, are just racist. An irrational fear/hatred towards a group of people based solely on where they come from is clearly ridiculous.

Personally, I'm not racist in the slightest - if this had been Christians complaining about a game, I'd be saying the same thing. Although, had it been a complaint of that matter, I don't think we'd have seen thousands (millions) of optical discs being yanked from shelves and replaced.


I can imagine that atheists will be more vocal, yes. There are theists who have picked their religion for themselves, but from what I've seen, the majority hold beliefs which they expect automatic respect for simply due to the fact that they inherited them from their parents or their culture/surroundings. That is to say, their religion of "choice" is more often than not a coincidence. With that in mind, I can imagine why atheists, who have probably had to actively think through the norms imposed by their surroundings, would be more vocal (or more rabid, depending on your point of view )

You are missing the point that no religious group has complained here at all.

One Muslim has pointed out that some Muslims may be offended, and Sony have said "Hey, we never knew that", and decided to change the soundtrack. I call that acting in a decent way - something we see far too little of in the 21st Century.

Islam is a religion of over a billion adherents, and 1,500 year's of history, so I believe it deserves at least a little respect.

Not being above or beyond legitimate criticism, just respect. And if you don’t respect the religion, how about respecting the feelings and beliefs of its adherents?

As I've said, if the makers of the game (or a film or book) wanted to make a legitimate criticism of Islam, then I don't believe they should be censored. But this is a potentially offensive part of the game which appears to have crept in by mistake, and you (and others) are insisting that Sony not be allowed to voluntarily decide to amend the game, and that, having discovered the possible offence, that they are not allowed to make an alteration.

And what alteration has been made? The removal of criticism of Islam's view of women? The removal of criticism of amputation as a punishment? No. The removal of a couple of verses of a book that you presumably have never read, and probably wouldn't agree with anyway.

Great crusade (pardon the pun)!

Frankly, we get the sort of society we deserve - no one has any respect for anyone else's opinions or beliefs, and on discovering we've accidentally caused offence we simply ignore the matter and say "tough". Is that what makes a good society?

BTW, look out for next week's news story. Tesco inadvertently use pig's fat in their biscuits, and are then criticised when they decide to use vegetable fat instead.

Meanwhile Salman Rushdie pens his new classic Aye Up Buddah, You Fat Bastard!

Steve W

[Muratcan]

Muslim here and me and many other Muslims don't care that there were Quran verses in the game. Give us our LBP!!!

Originally Posted by Pecker

Islam is a religion of over a billion adherents

Exactly. There are many different interpretations of Islam. A Muslim in Turkey (Secular country) would probably be less offended about the verses (I am of Turkish origin) than a Muslim of say Afghan ethnicity (Islamic republic).

[David Mackenzie]

You are missing the point that no religious group has complained here at all.

That's true enough, it was Sony Computer Entertainment's decision. However, actually recalling all those pressed copies - rather than just changing the soundtrack in a later pressing, or even patching it - seems like a huge move disproportionate to the apparent issue.

On a personal note, neither history/tradition or the number of people who have been influenced by something will, on their own, cause me to respect it, or their beliefs. Just because something's been done for a long time, or by a lot of people, doesn't mean that I'll automatically nod my head approvingly. That's not saying I necessarily DISrespect it without reason, though.

But to me, saying I automatically respect something that I haven't fully looked over would be foolish. Feelings are a different issue, admittedly, because to me those are a part of human decency (it's why I don't approach religious people and let rip my views to them). But if companies went out of their way to avoid hurting everyone's feelings...

As I've said, if the makers of the game (or a film or book) wanted to make a legitimate criticism of Islam, then I don't believe they should be censored. But this is a potentially offensive part of the game which appears to have crept in by mistake, and you (and others) are insisting that Sony not be allowed to voluntarily decide to amend the game, and that, having discovered the possible offence, that they are not allowed to make an alteration.

And what alteration has been made? The removal of criticism of Islam's view of women? The removal of criticism of amputation as a punishment? No. The removal of a couple of verses of a book that you presumably have never read, and probably wouldn't agree with anyway.

I think this is where our difference of opinion lies. You're right when you say that Sony is doing damage control in removing a small part of the game that was basically included by accident, and I agree that that's not really a big deal, Sony should be allowed to change it as they see fit.

The issue for me, is that they've delayed the game - at huge expense to themselves no doubt - over one complaint (or one warning). That seems completely out of proportion to any problem.

There are plenty of things that offend me and my principles (I use that word purposefully instead of "beliefs"), but I wouldn't ask for (or suggest that) an entertainment product to be altered as a result. These things are what they are.

BTW, look out for next week's news story. Tesco inadvertently use pig's fat in their biscuits, and are then criticised when they decide to use vegetable fat instead.

Being a vegetarian, I suppose that would affect me. But I would only purchase the biscuits if the vegetables had been treated humanely.

[godfarter]

Originally Posted by Pecker

There's no such thing as bad publicity.

They come out of this looking incredibly sensitive to the feelings of a minority.

Steve W

Originally Posted by David Mackenzie

I think this is where our difference of opinion lies. You're right when you say that Sony is doing damage control in removing a small part of the game that was basically included by accident, and I agree that that's not really a big deal, Sony should be allowed to change it as they see fit.

The issue for me, is that they've delayed the game - at huge expense to themselves no doubt - over one complaint (or one warning). That seems completely out of proportion to any problem.

Totally agree with you on that one

There is no other plausible reason why Sony would have decided to pull the release of LBP at such a late stage other than to capitalise on the world's current fixation with Islamophobia.

Their accounting departments must have felt the cost of re-pressing/re-boxing the game would be intangible to the amount of publicity/controversy they would garner through this move.

Furthermore October 2008 is filled with so many big game releases that maybe this was felt as a sensible marketing move to make LBP stand out from the crowd?

And besides...its only delayed for a couple of weeks

[David Mackenzie]

I'm not sure - the re-released version is said to land very close to the releases of Fable 2 and Gears of War 2! If they lose sales to gamers that way AND have to absorb the cost of testing a new disc image, glass mastering, pressing it, recalling the shipped copies from retail shelves, and swapping the old discs out with new ones - then it's not going to be pretty!

This is what I don't understand; that entire process can't be cheap. Why are they suddenly so cautious of offending people on this particular occasion?

[Sonic67]

Originally Posted by David Mackenzie

On a personal note, neither history/tradition or the number of people who have been influenced by something will, on their own, cause me to respect it, or their beliefs. Just because something's been done for a long time, or by a lot of people, doesn't mean that I'll automatically nod my head approvingly. That's not saying I necessarily DISrespect it without reason, though.

The delay to the game won't be at huge expense. Designing the game, coding the game, promoting it, shipping it will be all factors. Changing a track and repressing disks may cost a little but overall it's a small factor. Isn't pressing a disk about 50p per disk or something? If it had been recoded it would have been expensive. Off setting any costs is going to be extra publicity and probably a few sales in arabic countries maybe even due to this move. As for your feelings I don't think you will really figure.

Originally Posted by David Mackenzie

Being a vegetarian, I suppose that would affect me. But I would only purchase the biscuits if the vegetables had been treated humanely.

Remember this story?

BBC Learning English | Mars bars to remain vegetarian

Seems like some people decided to accomodate vegetarians. Personally I'm C of E and wasn't that bothered about the use of the Cathedral specifically but I do think if you go to the trouble of including any specific building in a game you should ask permission if not then use a generic building. I also quite like eating warm dead animals as well.

[David Mackenzie]

BBC Learning English | Mars bars to remain vegetarian

Seems like some people decided to accomodate vegetarians.

That's nice of them. If they hadn't, it would be my responsiblity to find something else that falls in line with my comparatively picky diet.

Also, while I'm not entirely sure of what it costs to press BD right now, I know from partial experience that yanking product from store shelves and swapping discs out is not cheap.

[synthesthesia]

Originally Posted by Sonic67

Seems like some people decided to accomodate vegetarians. Personally I'm C of E and wasn't that bothered about the use of the Cathedral specifically but I do think if you go to the trouble of including any specific building in a game you should ask permission if not then use a generic building. I also quite like eating warm dead animals as well.

I also quite like seeing christians make fools of themselves by phoning atheist call lines and getting owned

Seriously though, where was the need for that remark? If you like being a graveyard for animals fair enough, but why reiterate the fact on here to someone who's clearly against that? The original comment by David was meant as a comparison to the situation with LBP. Yours however was irrelevant, and highly provocative. Grow up.

[Sonic67]

Originally Posted by synthesthesia

I also quite like seeing christians make fools of themselves by phoning atheist call lines and getting owned

Seriously though, where was the need for that remark? If you like being a graveyard for animals fair enough, but why reiterate the fact on here to someone who's clearly against that? The original comment by David was meant as a comparison to the situation with LBP. Yours however was irrelevant, and highly provocative. Grow up.

We are omnivores. We have teeth and digestive systems that can eat both food groups with no physical ill health. Some people despite this voluntarily choose not to eat certain food groups. Some people voluntarily choose to believe in the existence of God. Society is capable of adjusting itself to cope with either group of people and I imagine both groups either appreciate such gestures or sometimes don't care at all.

[s.riaz]

Originally Posted by Pecker

There's no such thing as bad publicity.

They come out of this looking incredibly sensitive to the feelings of a minority.

Steve W

Not so much a minority:

Major Religions Ranked by Size

[Rygar]

The whole thing is totally ridiculous in my opinion. Something in a game is offence in someone's religion? So what? You could look at almost any art form/film/song/piece of software and you will find something that offends some group of people. Where do we draw the line? I expect google earth will be getting pulled soon as it offends the flat earth society. OK silly example but it underlines my point.

Religion just gets automatic respect in society that it simply does not deserve, we have just gotten used to giving it respect over the years and that is the problem. Then of course Islam injects a little bit of fear into the equation too because of its extremist's tendency towards violence when they get offended. All very sad.

I have no issue with people believing whatever they want to believe but this whole issue of "offence" really bothers me. If you have a set of beliefs in which certain things are offensive, that's fine, don't do them. But don't expect everyone else to respect those beliefs. People's rights to beliefs deserve respect, not the beliefs themselves.

[Sonic67]

Rewritten:

The whole thing is totally ridiculous in my opinion. Something in a chocolate bar is unacceptable to someone's diet? So what? You could look at almost any food group and you will find something that offends some group of people. Where do we draw the line? I expect bananas will be getting pulled soon as they're shape looks phallic. OK silly example but it underlines my point.

Vegetarianism just gets automatic respect in society that it simply does not deserve, we have just gotten used to giving it respect over the years and that is the problem. etc etc.

The whole rennet in Mars thing didn't bother me at all. I imagine it was done by the company to save money. Therefore my chocolate is now more expensive to keep the wishes of a small minority happy. Did non-vegetarians make a fuss over that?

I'm not sure how exactly the decisions made by a software company affects you or your day to day life. It's not a Government decision so it's not even your taxes. This world is made up of lots of people. It's usually a good thing to accomodate them. Especially if you are a business.

[David Mackenzie]

Turning a blind eye to this sort of thing and allowing religion to have free reign over such issues is incredibly dangerous.

With regards to the eating animals thing which seems to have become the main topic of this thread... I would say that there's hard, unpleasant proof of animal suffering and the like; yet there is no proof whatsoever (in some cases, proof against) of the feasibility of religion. I agree totally with Rygar as regards to religion getting automatic, unearned respect.

[Pecker]

Originally Posted by s.riaz

Not so much a minority:

Major Religions Ranked by Size

21% of the world's population are Muslim.

Are you saying that's a majority?



Steve W

[Pecker]

Originally Posted by David Mackenzie

Turning a blind eye to this sort of thing and allowing religion to have free reign over such issues is incredibly dangerous.

With regards to the eating animals thing which seems to have become the main topic of this thread... I would say that there's hard, unpleasant proof of animal suffering and the like; yet there is no proof whatsoever (in some cases, proof against) of the feasibility of religion. I agree totally with Rygar as regards to religion getting automatic, unearned respect.

Islam has a billion adherents and 1500 years' of history.

If someone stands up tomorrow and says they worship a giant cornflake, you may have a point.

But I think you're way off the mark on this one.

Steve W

[David Mackenzie]

I think we're going to start going in circles again; but I'm not sure why you think a billion adherents (an interesting choice of word coming from your pro-religious position, if I may say so) and X years of history will make the implausible plausible (or at least more respectable).

There are many traditions and customs with long histories. If they want my respect, they'll have to earn it, or at least be non-objectionable. For me, that discounts most religions.

Surely, if anything, the older something is, the more prone it is to superstition. Of course, this goes for all religions, not just Islam. As you say, if you tried to begin a religion nowadays, you'd be laughed and ridiculed for the outlandishness of it (Scientology anyone?)

I think in the end, the only thing we agree on is that Sony is covering itself!