Sony Very Sorry to the Very Reverend Rogers Govender

[fitbabits]

GameDaily (http://www.gamedaily.com/resistance-fall-of-man/playstation-3/game-news/5258/?articleID=42945) reports that Sony has apologized to the Church of England for the depiction of Manchester Cathedral which appeared in Resistance: Fall of Man.

"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 1950s Britain is under attack by aliens," said Sony in a statement to the BBC. "It was not our intention to cause offense by using a representation of Manchester Cathedral in chapter eight of the work. If we have done so, we sincerely apologize."

"We acknowledge the admission by Sony that the building in the game is Manchester Cathedral," said the Dean of the Cathedral, the Very Reverend Rogers Govender. "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."
I don't think an apology was necessary in this case, but I guess Sony thought otherwise. For once I believe that Sony should have stuck to their guns (!) and let people decide for themselves.

Has Sony boxed themselves into a corner by admitting any degree of culpability in this case...?

[Royal Fool]

From the Corporate Guidebook:

"Never mess with the churches, or they shall mess with you."

[Slack3r78]

Fuck capitulating to the church. This is such a non-story.

[Johan]

This is such a non-story.

It should have been a non-story. Sony apologized. Now, we have a story.

Edit: I don't think Sony should have apologized. In fact, I don't think they should even have admitted that there's any intentional connection between the game and the cathedral. Now, the issue has some legs to it and Sony has admitted it's in the game intentionally. Mistake.

[DeathtollWRX]

Never go against religion. Even kings were less powerful then the church.

[Philonious]

No corner. It is commonplace for public buildings to be depicted in the media... Unfortunately the Church doesn't own the rights to the physical depiction of the Cathedral so they don't have the right for legal action. Sony did the right thing by apologizing, and pointing out they took all the necessary steps to use the Cathedral in game... The Church wants money, not for Sony to pull the game.

[Pretzel]

It was appropriate for Sony to respond - it gave them the chance to reframe the issue and gain some empathy with the apology. By emphasizing the fact that it's standard scifi fare, they show the church's argument that this will somehow influence gun violence in Manchester is plain silliness. For the press, the issue is basically dead until the church raises more of a fuss, which will only make them look sillier.

Anyways, that's my theory.

[Chaos Machine]

Never go against religion. Even kings were less powerful then the church.

except for when the king had a pope assassinated and bribed the cardinals to elect his "chosen" pope. back in the 1500s the amount of duplicity involved in the papacy was not unlike the patronage system of government of chicago from the 1930s.

[Arglor]

i think laws in england are a lot more strict when it comes to images and public/private property and idenitity. "public opinion" is largely open to interpretation at this point, and could go any way. If sony had been bull-headed they very well may have been blasted and called "egotistical and stubborn..."....

oh hell i forgot they are already called egotistical and stubborn aren't they?

[Judas]

they're simply being political with the pompous ass pulpit hierarchy.

[TrackZero]

I think it was the right thing for Sony to do, however it is going to be a case where now that they've shown "weakness" and the proverbial "other guy" is being a cock and won't let it go, it definitely hurts them.

Shame on the Cathedral's Dean, IMHO.

[Nihilophile]

Never go against religion. Even kings were less powerful then the church.

People < Governments <> Corporations < "The Church"

I'm not religious, that's just basically how the "bow down" order seems to go.

I think sony took a mature position in admiting it is the same church and apologizing even if they didn't 'have to'. I don't think this will go any further than this. Sony's legal team would have to review any statement like this in advance.

[bean19]

Litigious churches. . . fantastic.

Well, I'm not sure if they are taking the position in order to try to sue Sony or not, so that's speculation. In any case, I think it is ridiculous for a church to become offended against fictional violence against fictional aliens in a fictional scenario.

[joshkdmw]

Shit!

I was hoping this wouldn't happen. This sets a precedent for future such cases. Now, no matter where a game is set, if it has material like this in it, it can become a problem.

If another Rainbow six game is set in Vegas, then there's sure to be problems.

By setting a precedence of fault against the game developers in such a scenario, it can only cause problems when it comes to creative licensing.

I'm telling you, attorneys will be quoting this event for years to come, and Sony will rue their stop-gap solution. If a competent attorney is hired by New York (and I hear they have a couple down there), and NY doesn't want the next violent video game to come out in NY, game developers will get riped apart.

[Nihilophile]

By setting a precedence of fault against the game developers in such a scenario, it can only cause problems when it comes to creative licensing.

not a game (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Devil%27s_Advocate_%28film%29#Legal_problems), but same shit.

[Ondo]

Has Sony boxed themselves into a corner by admitting any degree of culpability in this case...?
Everything I've seen said the church has no case, so no, Sony hasn't. They've just admitted the obvious, and what they did still isn't illegal.

[Pretzel]

Shit!

I was hoping this wouldn't happen. This sets a precedent for future such cases. Now, no matter where a game is set, if it has material like this in it, it can become a problem.

Chill out. This isn't a court of law and Sony hasn't admitted to anything that wasn't already obvious. If there is a legal issue here, it will be sorted out--I'm sure without setting any kind of legal precedent.

I think this will blow over. There's nothing juicy about this news now that Sony apologized so the news orgs will find something else to write about.

[bean19]

Shit!

I was hoping this wouldn't happen. This sets a precedent for future such cases. Now, no matter where a game is set, if it has material like this in it, it can become a problem.

If another Rainbow six game is set in Vegas, then there's sure to be problems.

Not in the U.S.

We have long established precedent regarding works of fiction and freedom of speech.

[JazGalaxy]

Either I'm totally missing the point here, or everyone elsei s totally missing the point here. I'm honestly not sure which it is.

Is the church not pissed off because Sony created a game wherein you shoot and kill things inside the church?

I don't think they care that they used the property in the game, as though Las Vegas would be mad at R6:Vegas, I think they're mad that they digitally descrated a supposedly holy area by including it in a murderous videogame.

[torrefaction]

Holy overreaction batman.

They just acknowledged it was the cathedral. They apologized if it offended anyone, but they don't agree (They say that in the first sentence).

That's hardly capitulating to the church...that's just good PR.

[MaiXu]

"Very Reverend Rogers Govender"

That man has too many "v"s in his name.

[Qoz]

It was the right thing to do.

If they went against the church this could have snowballed. It has all the elements of a quick-CNN-gaming-news-special, where Sony would look like an ass.

The church is all about forgiving, so the church could really do NOTHING if Sony just apologized. And Sony did, but very little. Still the church cannot act with fury, when people are apologizing, even if they still have a point, so they are forced to accept it. Good thinking by Sony.

The Church really has no true power they can use (perhaps in the US, but not in Europe anyway). It is all about not pissing them off.

[JCtheMC]

Never go against religion. Even kings were less powerful then the church.

Thanks for the update. What 17th Century reality do you live in?

[BigJonno]

I think this was perfectly handled by Sony.

"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 1950s Britain is under attack by aliens,"

Brilliant, absolutely brilliant. Yes, they apologised for possibly causing offence, but the above line just shows how petty the situation really is.

[DingBat]

No corner. It is commonplace for public buildings to be depicted in the media... Unfortunately the Church doesn't own the rights to the physical depiction of the Cathedral so they don't have the right for legal action. Sony did the right thing by apologizing, and pointing out they took all the necessary steps to use the Cathedral in game... The Church wants money, not for Sony to pull the game.

Oh come on. Let's dial down the standard gamer bullshit cynicism a bit here and try to re-establish a relationship with reality.

First, how do you know what the Church does or doesn't have rights to?

Second, I suspect what the Church really wanted was for Sony to ask them BEFORE they used the model in the game. I actually kind of agree with that. If Sony came around taking pictures of my house for a game, I might be concerned too.

It's a CHURCH, and a very recognizable one, for god's sake. I know that doesn't mean all that much to most here, which is evident by the fact that this is even considered a story at all, but someone at Sony should have thought a bit first. Can you imagine the outcry if the game had blown up the Al Aqsa mosque?

[Lekon]

Fark had a great tagline about this.

Sony apologizes for Problems Resistance: Fall of Man caused when church complained about Resistance: Fall of man. Yes, that's Resistance: Fall of Man, by Sony!

[Yeti]

I'm a design communications student and one of the credos I go by is "just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should".

I believe DingBat hit the nail on the head. The church would probably just like to be asked on how the cathederal should be used, maybe they would want some kind of recompense for their church been in the game, maybe not. Either way, the appropriation of it by Sony was handled incorrectly and so imo the apology by Sony is the least they could do.

[Yeti2005]

This will all go away once Sony pays the church off (cough...extortion...cough).

This whole situation is ridiculous. I think Sony did the right thing by apologizing but it needs to stop there.

Edit: Dammit, there's another Yeti! :)

[Wraith]

Sony's response sounds appropriate and mature. While I can understand why the church would be concerned with using a revered place of worship as a setting for a game (or movie or what have you), I don't think it merits Sony pulling it from store shelves, which the church wants them to do. (Have there been any movies set in said cathedral, and did they provoke the same amount of outcry?)

Here's a BBC article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/6736809.stm) on the issue (pre-apology). There seems to be plenty of the 'violent games are bad', 'violent games create violent kids' mentality in those interviewed. Which goes back to the general violent games debate (already rated M, parents responsibility, reality vs. fiction, blah blah blah).
Fark had a great tagline about this.

Sony apologizes for Problems Resistance: Fall of Man caused when church complained about Resistance: Fall of man. Yes, that's Resistance: Fall of Man, by Sony!Yeah, any publicity is good publicity. I doubt this news will do anything to reduce sales of the game.

[Skyelan]

Yeah, any publicity is good publicity.

Yeah, I mean, look at all the publicity Sony's had, especially among gamers, for a whole year starting specifically at E3. Almost every day, to the point of annoyance, gamers, sites, journalists, etc. talking shit and the hype diminishing with every new thing they did.

And look at them now! All that publicity sure has done them good, hasn't it?

I have no issues with the news itself, and this is one of the few things I'll applaud Sony on, but COME ON. I'd like to think enough as happened that we can stop spouting 'Any publicity is good publicity' BS. It isn't even VAGUELY true.

[Wolvie]

Did Sony make a mistake? No, freedom of speech dictates that. But the apology goes a long way to make Sony seem less evil... that and they don't talk shit anymore. Keep it up Sony.

[51|RandoM]

you know, if manchester were invaded by aliens and the armed services of the world united to kick their asses off the planet, I don't think the church would be complaining that much about the violence required to do so.

Feel free to sit back and bask in the safety provided by the gun violence you're particularly against, Dean.


*disclaimer: I am currently re-reading Starship Troopers.

[joshkdmw]

Either I'm totally missing the point here, or everyone elsei s totally missing the point here. I'm honestly not sure which it is.

Is the church not pissed off because Sony created a game wherein you shoot and kill things inside the church?

I don't think they care that they used the property in the game, as though Las Vegas would be mad at R6:Vegas, I think they're mad that they digitally descrated a supposedly holy area by including it in a murderous videogame.


Las Vegas WAS mad.

Gamepolitics had the story. (http://gamepolitics.livejournal.com/323342.html)

There are several other stories regarding Las Vegas, as well. Go to gamepolitics.com and search "Las Vegas".

[Thenetcase]

I'm sorry but this is retarded...
I am a Christian and all that, but sometimes for the sake of realism and not showing partiality, you've got to accept the fact that the church buildings might be destroyed or damaged during a war. "Enemies at the gate" don't generally avoid destroying your religious house of worship. EVER.

Besides, honestly and truly and technically and all that rot, if you really want to get technical, it's not the building that even matters-- it's the people. With out the people, there would be no "church". So they should be whining about people being killed instead of a building being destroyed.
This is yet another way that humans are sick and twisted. Even the "Very Reverend" humans apparently put more emphasis on the building than the people. That's just stupid.

And for the record... I think it's retarded to whine about people dying in a computer game. Highly fictional stuff... When it's NOT fiction, people actually tend to care (e.g. Sept 11th Twin Towers).

Just my two cents.

[Citizen Philip]

Holy overreaction batman.

They just acknowledged it was the cathedral. They apologized if it offended anyone, but they don't agree (They say that in the first sentence).

That's hardly capitulating to the church...that's just good PR.

Agreed. I think it was the polite thing to do, nothing more.

[Pretzel]

Besides, honestly and truly and technically and all that rot, if you really want to get technical, it's not the building that even matters-- it's the people. With out the people, there would be no "church". So they should be whining about people being killed instead of a building being destroyed.
This is yet another way that humans are sick and twisted. Even the "Very Reverend" humans apparently put more emphasis on the building than the people. That's just stupid.

Read the article. His main complaint centers around the fact that the game dipicts people getting killed in the church and that they already have a problem with violence in Manchester.