'Sick' game gets dropped

Author: Ryan Garside
Published: 24th November 2006
Comments (27) Stumble
Rule of Rose won't be filling any childrens stockings this Christmas.

Rule of Rose won't be filling any childrens stockings this Christmas.

We reported last week that Rule of Rose was kicking up a whole storm of controversy with its impending release in Europe. MCV now reports that publisher, 505 Games, has pulled the plug on Rule of Rose – at least for the time being.

It appears that the Video Standards Council (VSC) is pretty upset with the whole kafuffle. MCV quoted Laurie Hall, Secretary General for the VSC, as saying:

"I have no idea where the suggestion of in-game sadomasochism has come from, nor children being buried underground. These are things that have been completely made up.

There isn’t any underage eroticism. And the most violent scene does indeed see one of the young girls scare Jennifer with a rat on a stick. But the rat’s actually quite placid towards her and even licks her face."

The real problem the VSC has is the reports made by The Times and The Daily Mail which had quoted EU justice commissioner Franco Frattini as describing the game as 'obscene'.

The game has been released in other territories so if you're desperate to get your hands on it then there is the possibility of importing. However the reviews so far have been pretty average so I wouldn't worry yourself too much about it.

Is it right to ban sick games? Or has censorship gone mad? Discuss in the forums.
Newsletter

Register for the bit-tech newsletter to receive the latest news and reviews in your inbox.



Quote Atomic 24th November 2006, 14:26
Link dead...
Quote Glider 24th November 2006, 14:28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomic
Link dead...
Quote TheSaladMan 24th November 2006, 14:36
If this was dropped because it's a badly made game I wouldn't be so annoyed, but the fact that it was dropped because of the controversy just sickens me.

It's always sad when something gets dropped because of controversy. People really need to grow up, get out of this Daily Mail state of mind and start realising that just because you don't find something fun, doesn't mean someone else shouldn't.
Quote bllt2bnry 24th November 2006, 14:47
I watched the view of this on Gametrailers a while back and I can't see at all where this controversy stems from.. it did not look bad at all. Just a badly made game.
Quote Tyinsar 24th November 2006, 15:20
Who wanted this game in the first place? To me it sounded like crap anyway. Then again I think that of 75% of what comes out of Hollywood too. :(
Quote K 24th November 2006, 15:27
3/10 in EDGE.

'nuff said really.
Quote Spaced_invader 24th November 2006, 16:11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan Garside
Is it right to ban sick games? Or has censorship gone mad?

not any more than it is to ban films or other form of media and art.
Quote <A88> 24th November 2006, 16:28
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSaladMan
It's always sad when something gets dropped because of controversy. People really need to grow up, get out of this Daily Mail state of mind and start realising that just because you don't find something fun, doesn't mean someone else shouldn't.
Well in that case, just because you don't enjoy touching little children, it doesn't mean we should stop Mr X from doing so. Although this game is considered 'harmless fun', if it's allowing people to act out acts that are disturbing enough for this to happen, then I'm glad the publisher has taken the initiative to drop it. Controversy for controversy's sake doesn't make a good game, just a way of seeking publicity and trying to exploit the fairly laid back censorship laws already in place in our countries, and even though I'm against banning games pretty much all of the time, the line needs to be drawn somewhere.

<A88>
Quote aggies11 24th November 2006, 16:33
"Chilling Effects".

The ultimate end result of actions like these, means eventually the only games that will get made are Collapse, Bejewelled and Sponge Bob....

:(

Aggies
Quote Cobalt 24th November 2006, 16:46
Quote:
Originally Posted by <A88>
Well in that case, just because you don't enjoy touching little children, it doesn't mean we should stop Mr X from doing so. Although this game is considered 'harmless fun', if it's allowing people to act out acts that are disturbing enough for this to happen, then I'm glad the publisher has taken the initiative to drop it. Controversy for controversy's sake doesn't make a good game, just a way of seeking publicity and trying to exploit the fairly laid back censorship laws already in place in our countries, and even though I'm against banning games pretty much all of the time, the line needs to be drawn somewhere.

<A88>
How do you know how bad the content of the game was. From what I've heard it certainly wasn't approaching the "disturbingness" some of the big horror game franchises. The only controversial thing about it seems to be that it involves kids
Quote phonon45 24th November 2006, 18:19
Quote:
Originally Posted by <A88>
Well in that case, just because you don't enjoy touching little children, it doesn't mean we should stop Mr X from doing so. Although this game is considered 'harmless fun', if it's allowing people to act out acts that are disturbing enough for this to happen, then I'm glad the publisher has taken the initiative to drop it. Controversy for controversy's sake doesn't make a good game, just a way of seeking publicity and trying to exploit the fairly laid back censorship laws already in place in our countries, and even though I'm against banning games pretty much all of the time, the line needs to be drawn somewhere.

<A88>

I can do without the censors thank you very much. I don't think that this game (or any game for that matter) will compel anyone to do anything that they are not predisposed to do either by nature or nurture. Video games are not to blame for people's actions. Anyone that says otherwise is just trying to manipulate you by appealing to your base instincts.
Quote DXR_13KE 24th November 2006, 18:38
like punisher... the game, it rocked.... especially the torture scenes, the part that sucked was the way they censored some of the tortures...... :(
Quote Tyinsar 24th November 2006, 19:50
Quote:
Originally Posted by phonon45
...I don't think that this game (or any game for that matter) will compel anyone to do anything that they are not predisposed to do either by nature or nurture...
Some would argue that certain things can indulge & nurture latent issues which would not manifest themselves otherwise.
Quote Miser 24th November 2006, 22:19
Quote:
Originally Posted by <A88>
Well in that case, just because you don't enjoy touching little children, it doesn't mean we should stop Mr X from doing so. Although this game is considered 'harmless fun', if it's allowing people to act out acts that are disturbing enough for this to happen, then I'm glad the publisher has taken the initiative to drop it. Controversy for controversy's sake doesn't make a good game, just a way of seeking publicity and trying to exploit the fairly laid back censorship laws already in place in our countries, and even though I'm against banning games pretty much all of the time, the line needs to be drawn somewhere.

<A88>

Didn't you read the article? Bit reported that the most disturbing thing was a rat on a stick...
Quote Stuey 24th November 2006, 23:45
It's better to be a safe chicken than a dead duck. Also, it's better to deprive 10,000 people of a certain game than risk the possibility that 10 sick people will get ideas from something in the game. See, I know nothing about the game except what I just read, but let's judge it anyways! [/sarcasm]

If the game was only rated a 3 our of 10, there's no use fighting the censors or the controversy. It's better for people to pick a better battle and get upset over worthier things.

Hmm. Now if only someone could put a breast-feeding hack into a game. If the censors react as harshly as they did way back with the GTA hot coffee mod issue, the lactivists would bring the censors down for us.
Quote Lazarus Dark 25th November 2006, 01:00
stupid. some people need to get a life.

dont like it? dont buy it.
Quote Yemerich 25th November 2006, 19:19
Isn't movies much more realistic than games?
Why does anybody care to ban "The Hostrel"? Because somebody said "if u don't like it, dont watch it". Simple

Besides, have u guys seen something more sadistic and violent than "The Passion of the Christ" from Mel Gibson? Just because it's "Christ" nobody comments it.. For chrits sake!

If u have some guy to ban a game, whats the censorship for?

All I have to say about people who are trying to ban games is:
"Go get a real job!"
Quote Cthippo 25th November 2006, 19:42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuey
It's better to be a safe chicken than a dead duck. Also, it's better to deprive 10,000 people of a certain game than risk the possibility that 10 sick people will get ideas from something in the game. See, I know nothing about the game except what I just read, but let's judge it anyways! [/sarcasm]

I was all set to blow a gasket until I saw the sarcasam tag. I need to pay closer attention :o
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuey
If the game was only rated a 3 our of 10, there's no use fighting the censors or the controversy. It's better for people to pick a better battle and get upset over worthier things.

Yeah, but if you don't fight them on the little stuff we may never see the next great game because someone decides that it might get censored. I agree, based on the reviews the game probably isn't worth buying, but sometimes you have to stand on principal because there may not be another opportunity.
Quote Fod 25th November 2006, 21:03
who cares? the game sucks ass.
Quote Emon 26th November 2006, 06:00
With the possible exception of public airways et al, censorship of any kind is bad.

Also, the game sucks ass.
Quote Jokkocze 26th November 2006, 14:56
I dont get it.. they allow movies like saw, the ring and battle royale, but when a game that sounds like it could be somewhat as sick as any of those, its banned..
Quote Cthippo 26th November 2006, 17:38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jokkocze
I dont get it.. they allow movies like saw, the ring and battle royale, but when a game that sounds like it could be somewhat as sick as any of those, its banned..

Basically the violence is fine, it's the hint of sex that killed it.
Quote Hovis 26th November 2006, 18:01
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fod
who cares? the game sucks ass.

If the anti-fun lobby can get a crap game pulled then they're only a step away from getting a good game pulled, and then it's civil war.
Quote Stuey 26th November 2006, 19:01
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hovis
If the anti-fun lobby can get a crap game pulled then they're only a step away from getting a good game pulled, and then it's civil war.
Well, while I agree that things may escalate, I highly doubt that pulling games off the market will lead to civil wars. =P I mean, who's willing to die for their right to play certain video games?
Quote DXR_13KE 26th November 2006, 22:39
YOU HAVE TO FIGHT *THAM THAM* FOR YOUR RIGHT *THAM THAM* TO GAME!!!!!!!!
:D
Quote Tyinsar 27th November 2006, 07:48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emon
With the possible exception of public airways et al, censorship of any kind is bad....
Sorry, gotta call bull**** on that. Almost all of us believe in censorship of some form. I think we can almost all agree that it should be illegal to publish things like calls for the death of people based on race / religion / ... or child porn (not that I'm calling this game that - though it sounds like it might have been stepping in that direction).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jokkocze
I dont get it.. they allow movies like saw, the ring and battle royale, but when a game that sounds like it could be somewhat as sick as any of those, its banned..
I think that the difference is that games are perceived as being targeted towards children. My 11 year old nephew plays GTA - beating up hookers for cash - how appropriate is that? Blame it on the parents all you want (single father in this case) but kids will find ways to get these games - it's a bit harder (but not much) for him to get into the theater to see those movies.

Cthippo started an interesting thread (link) quoting an article about "'Tweens' becoming the new teens" that IMHO relates somewhat to this.
Quote Iago 27th November 2006, 11:35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fod
who cares? the game sucks ass.

I do. If the game is bad, sales should have been low, but I need better reasons than those provided so far before I accept any kind of censorship in video-games.

I'd love to find Franco Frattini's email, to tell him what do I exactly think of his "opinions" on video games ([edit]found the contact info: http://ec.europa.eu/commission_barroso/frattini/contact_en.htm[/edit]). Also, I would think that the EU Commision, or Parlament have more important things to think about than video games for adults...but it seems they don't, wich explains many things.

The underlying problem in this, is that it shows again, that we have a bunch of polliticians with no knowledge whatsoever about technology and new forms of entertainment.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



MSI GX700 Laptop


Stats: 0.076 seconds