|
|
PS3 vs. The Church of England
Author: Joe MartinPublished: 11th June 2007
Controversy rages over a battle in Resistance: Fall of Man, which takes place in Manchester Cathedral.
Still, Sony is a giant of the industry and has admirably weathered the storm in each and every case, though this time it may have finally met its match as The Church of England opposes the PS3 game, Resistance: Fall of Man.
The dispute between The Church and Sony has arisen over an in-game battle which takes place in the nave of Manchester Cathedral. The Church claims that Sony has used the location without asking for permission and are furious that the house of God would be used as a backdrop for such a violent scene.
"For a global manufacturer to re-create one of our great cathedrals with photo-realistic quality and then encourage people to have guns battles in the building is beyond belief and highly irresponsible." Said The Bishop of Manchester, Rt Revd Nigel McCulloch.
Sony has yet to respond to the Church, who are now demanding that the game be pulled from shelves, that a public apology be made and that a 'large donation' be given. All Sony has said on the matter is the following, reasserting that the game is actually fiction:
"Resistance: Fall of Man is a fantasy science fiction game and is not based on reality. The game is set in an alternate and mythical version of Europe in the 1950s, in which the enemy are strange looking alien invaders seeking to destroy humanity.
Whilst we believe that we have sought and received all permissions necessary for the creation of the game, we will be contacting the Cathedral authorities in order to better understand their concerns in more detail."
It's an interesting situation, and opinion is divided on who's right in this escalating battle. There are a massive number of games with churches in after all, so is The Church of England simply using this as a chance to oppose violence in the media due to the perceived wave of negativity towards Sony in Europe? Can Sony really be faulted for using the location in a game which is obviously fictional?
Is Sony right to use free speech in this way? Is violence in the media too widespread? If God was one of us, which console would he favour? Let us know your answers in the forums.
Related articles on bit-tech.net
Comments (26)
Stats: 0.074 seconds
.......although the ending might be a bit of a giveaway.
You know it! :D
Wonder if there is a mod out there for any first person shooter like that.
I've seen Manchester Cathedral many times, and its a beautiful place and I certainly can't imagine gun fights going on in it. I am slightly suprised that sony didnt just make a random church that couldn't be identified, its almost as if they are looking for trouble.
True, but nobody has the right not to be offended. I'm an atheist and only believe in the real world in front of me, does that mean that every act of violence offends me or that I don't stand for peace and love? Not at all, as religion and morality are not at all linked - every suicide bomber against the west and the history of the crusades proves that.
Just because something represents someones beliefs doesn't mean that other people cannot oppose it, adapt it, mimick it or change it. I agree it's possibly insensitive for sony not to apologise, but they should really do no more than that in a reasonable culture as they have the right to freedom of speech through a creative medium and the only way they can legally be opposed is if the church counts as copyrightable property. However, it ends there in my opinion and if people get offended they can write a letter to Mr Playstation himself.
Just my two cents
I would agree with you, had the Church not said they wanted a big donation. They had me going that it was a bad thing Sony was going, then they mentioned money, and then you realize just how much the Church really doesn't give a damn about religion, cept for a handful of Church officials here and there. It's rather disgusting honestly IMO, you should see the Church near my house, the priest is always asking for donations to "renovate" the Church, but it's always looking as crappy, the furniture is still just as old, nothing has changed, oh wait, he bought a Hummer H2, and a new 7 bedroom house, and he's sending his son to an expensive college, and his daughter goes to an expensive private school. My family has lost all belief in church. So I hope Sony wins :)
I think the church is trying to make a big deal out of a very small and benign issue, asking for the donation is kinda shady as well.
i think its ridiculous, i mean if they were truly serious about desecrating a connection to god, then wouldn't they appose any violent game happening anywhere i mean after all the earth was created by his own hands right?
i could see the church having an argument if they showed the clergymen performing satanic rituals in the basement of it. but its just a building made by man as a place to be with others that believe the same thing. the universe as they would believe it is gods house.
Although i have to agree with the above, it sounds rather like extortion
The cathedral is over 800 years old, so unless the architect is a vampire then they don't have a leg to stand on legally. If the architect IS a vampire, then the church should deal with him and stop fart-arseing around with all this Sony nonsense.
Quite honestly, I would be honord if someone chose my house as a location for a video game. That would be pretty sweet.. sadly my house isn't quite that exciting.
Secondly, your argument is taken out of context as soon as you mentioned people. In resistance there arent priests that look like the priests who live at this cathedral. Hell, to my knowledge there aren't priests - PERIOD! If there were and it was in effect a semblence of a simulation killing priests i could understand them being upset.
As it stands they have no grounds upon which to be upset. Churches have been used in various other mediums from movies to books to television shows and it usually goes through without complaint. Unless there were implications that this was reality, non-fiction, and thus having some false real-world commentary (is this cathedral really the site of bloody battles with aliens bent on human conquest?) then they may have some traction in the form of slander.
As it stands waht resistance does is akin to someone telling a yo-mama joke about Jimmy's mother (Jimmys momma so stuipid she... !). When jimmy hears it he succinctly demands a forced public apology and some sort of compensation.
You can ALMOST see why the person (jimmy in this example) would be upset if you really try and sympathize for them but once logic, reason and context are applied the arguement is rendered moot and you have to question the sanity and emotional stability of the offended.
1. The churchs main concern seemed to be the use of the interior of the building being used for a gunfight, the same church that has tried for a good number of years to reduce gun crime (yes probably in their own ineffectual way) in one of the most gun prolific places in the UK. Making it feel to them that their building was encouraging gunfights and destroying the work they have done.
2. In this day and age the only way to attract the attention of a major multinational organisation is to threaten their profit, so yes money was going to be shouted about.
3. If your worried they may be misusing funds raise a query to the church elders or depending on the diocese the district chairman or bishop.
4. Priests are not monks and are allowed possessions, so what if they happen to want a nice car.
5. The church has raised to my mind an interesting debate on the legal ownership of the graphical representation of privately owned interior spaces, leaving aside the fact that its the church that has raised this where do people stand if someone creates a virtual copy of your house and fills it with animal porn?
Now you may all happily ignore this post as another of those religious nut cases.
Really, people, let's try to keep this in perspective. So you saw a priest driving a Ferrari. It is possible for priests to have other forms of income. It's entirely possible that the person you saw was wealthy before becoming a priest. Do you even know, for certain, that the person was a priest to begin with. How did he come to own the car? Did he pilfer the donation bin, acting the part of the greedy, good-for-nothin' priest that you already had in mind? Did he save up his own money for years and years, making wise investments, just to treat himself with something nice? This kind of comment just shows an utter lack of understanding of how organized religion works.
As soon as I saw this news on the front page, I just knew that I would come here to find the anti-religious zealots out in force. Good to see that I wasn't disappointed.
I can see why the church is taken aback. Sony have used a recognizable structure (one that does indeed stand for peace) and have used it as a location for a violent confrontation. It doesn't matter what form the building has taken: Photograph, video, or digital render; Sony have used the likeness without permission. I wonder what Sony would think of me creating a digital render of the Playstation 3, and using that image to make money?
Some people have mentioned that churches and priests are used in film all the time. Generally, when a known church is used in a media form (particularly any interior shots), the producer obtains permission to use the location. Watch the credits for any movie, and you'll generally see a list of people and places that are given thanks for their cooperation. Contrary to popular belief, film crews don't just show up on the street and start filming.
Furthermore, just because something was done in the past, it doesn't make it right. Maybe the church - in the general sense of the word - is growing tired of seeing its image used over and over again in a negative light. "Too bad," you say, "that's how it's always been, and you didn't complain before."
Yeah, if only those slaves hadn't started complaining, either...
-monkey
I see some of still haven't grown out of jumping on the anti-Sony bandwagon.
Sony are just showing themselves to be their usual arrogant, we can do no wrong selves.
All aboard!
That arrogance label sure is getting out of hand ;)