Catherine Publisher Talks About Covering Up Game's Risque Art

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

So the 'west' is now specifically the US?

I'm sure us Europeans will be getting unedited copies anyhow.

ProfessorLayton:

ramox:
Because we all know, pictures with suggested sexuality damage a childrens brain, right? Right.

Your post pretty much sums up everything wrong with how sexuality is treated in america. It's something kids below 16 (or so) needn't be exposed to...or else something horriblee will happen...i guess.

I'm not saying it causes much damage in the way you're thinking of. And you know what? It is wrong how sexuality is being treated in America. People make too big of a deal about something that literally has to happen for humanity to survive. But overindulgence is just as bad as complete abstinence and unnecessarily throwing in tits on the box art of a video game when it can easily be censored and give off the same message is wrong. Call it hypocritical, but being overly sexual for no reason just so you can spit the first amendment back at whoever challenges it is silly and annoying.

It's not that I'm suggesting everyone castrate themselves because every sexual urge is completely immoral and you'll burn in hell forever because you once glanced and a Playboy when you were 13. But I am suggesting that other people believe that and no matter how crazy you might think it is some people don't want anything like that anywhere near their kids and would get extremely upset when you could avoid any parental outrage by just panning the camera up slightly. And if you really think this isn't that bad, would you like to explain buying this game in the presence of a parent/grandparent? While you might feel that it's not that bad, other people do.

You see, where i live people like the ones you discribe exist too. The ones which for some odd reason have issues with displayed (or even suggested) sexuality.
The big difference though is, here they are not the braud majority. They are a bunch of old people which didn't notice that a new decade has started or misguided feminists. In america it is a widely accepted and even supported standard.

I would assume the reason for that is simply because somehow that prude mindset was enforced for so long that people started to see it as normal. So much so that no one even questiones the status quo. Because, "no tits on the cover, so what?" Right?
That my friend is how non-chance happens.

And about your question at the end. That is the difference i talk about at the begin. Your average mom (maybe not grandma, but that depends) wouldn't even ask for an explanation. Son boys a game about sex? k, cool, whatever.
See where i'm getting at?

Sheesh, retailers. Carrying any copies of Basic Instinct 2 or Wild Things? Grow a spine.

ugh, so how long will it be before Catherine gets labeled as a sex/rape simulator?

Seriously, the game is probably the freshest most original thing to come out in a while and im afraid it might get diced by the media. :\

Tin Man:
Everything about sex v violence has been said and done, Americans are weird etc...

My point, is that gaming WILL NOT be taken seriously while shit like this can be allowed to happen. Graphic sexual imagery is used to advertise pretty much everything. I walk past images of women in extremely sexual lingerie(Ann Summers shops on the walk route into the office = win) every day... Video covers, music albums... But games aren't given the green light because they're seen as for kids, even the blatantly mature ones like Catherine.

This. It is being censored because people in charge are still thinking all games are being marketed toward kids. It is tainted with USA's pathologic prudishness (where it's alright for a kid to catch a glimpse of suggestive violence but not if it's suggestive sexuality), but this is the problematic issue behind this. A product being marketed to adults with a coherently themed artwork and publicity material wouldn't be wrong. Ah! But it's a game, then surely kids must be protected since surely they are the only possible client for these things, right?

The one thing I cannot believe...

People are getting up and arms about the fact that the game promotional material is censored?

Cannot we all get focused on you know... The game parts of the game instead of "How much of teh sex" is on the cover?

ramox:
You see, where i live people like the ones you discribe exist too. The ones which for some odd reason have issues with displayed (or even suggested) sexuality.
The big difference though is, here they are not the braud majority. They are a bunch of old people which didn't notice that a new decade has started or misguided feminists. In america it is a widely accepted and even supported standard.

I would assume the reason for that is simply because somehow that prude mindset was enforced for so long that people started to see it as normal. So much so that no one even questiones the status quo. Because, "no tits on the cover, so what?" Right?
That my friend is how non-chance happens.

And about your question at the end. That is the difference i talk about at the begin. Your average mom (maybe not grandma, but that depends) wouldn't even ask for an explanation. Son boys a game about sex? k, cool, whatever.
See where i'm getting at?

But the problem is in the ambiguity. If it's not universally socially acceptable, chances are you shouldn't push it for the time being. Times will change and so will people's opinions on what is and isn't socially acceptable. I don't know where you're from, but where I'm from people aren't exactly very smart or accepting. I personally don't think it's worth it to offend them for no reason (even if they shouldn't be offended in the first place) when you could easily edit the image and make it fine. I honestly believe that in 50 years or so everyone will look back at the fact that we felt the need to censor this and laugh about it but right now there's no reason to be upset when something like this happens. You can still buy a game with the original art so there isn't a problem.

Honestly! WHY SO MANY NEWS POSTS ABOUT A GAME ABOUT SEX WITH POTENTIAL NUDITY??!!

I mean it was already weird at first, but now 20 news posts about it later... Well, it's a LOT weirder.

Seriously guys, WTF?

boag:
ugh, so how long will it be before Catherine gets labeled as a sex/rape simulator?

Seriously, the game is probably the freshest most original thing to come out in a while and im afraid it might get diced by the media. :\

Similar accusations to the above didn't stop Mass Effect from being a best seller (hell, Fox claimed those accusations along with the originator). There's no such thing as bad publicity as they say [besides, I didn't see any pedophilia claims for Disgaea just because the 3 main characters are the netherworld equivalent to early teens (for those not in the know, the disgaea exchange rate from human to demon\angel is 1=100, a 1 year old human is equal in age to a 100 year old demon), so I don't think a similarly obscure game like Catherine would gain them].

ramox:

acsoundwave:

Not "America", but Wal-Mart & K-Mart: they have to stock the game.

(captcha: ecomagination...?)

...just, no.

It's not Wal-Mart or the like. It is indeed a US thing. And one that will never cease to baffle me.
Nowhere else nudity and sexuality are regarded as less apropriate for minors than any kind of violence.

so yeah:

GrizzlerBorno:
Some day America will stop being such a Hypocritical prude.....

Really just a US thing?
Funny as we aren't the ones banning Dead or Alive: Dimensions over less.

I guess what I just dont get about this game is the sex appeal that's always talked about. I don't find anything about it that attractive or sexy, girls look gaunt and lifeless- far more creepy than anything else.

I'll just overlook this seeing as Catherine is almost here.
Yay! Come on July!

ProfessorLayton:
...it's just a little too much, in my opinion.

There is a difference and if you disagree, then I want you to think of watching movies with your parents. I can bet that you'll be fine through all the violence, but the minute a sex scene shows up you'll start feeling uncomfortable.

A little snipping for brevity, but I am addressing your entire comment.

Your opinion and that discomfort of watching sexual content with parents or other authority figures is a cultural artifact. It's a commonly held belief (whether or not it's actually true, I can't say for certain, not having experienced it myself) that in European cultures sexuality and sexual imagery is not as frowned upon and most people have more liberal attitudes about it.

The fact that you contrast watching violence or sexuality that way with your parents really shows your cultural bias. Your society has said "violence is ok, sexuality is not". You might think nothing of watching a TV show where a man is murdered by being shot. Where that man is shown being shot, bleeding, possibly treated in an ER before finally succumbing to a fatal, criminal action. At the same time, a pair of breasts on the same screen can make you squirm if your parents are watching with you.

When and why did violence become more culturally acceptable than sexuality? Humans are capable of both, yet one is demonized, one is glorified.

ProfessorLayton:
If it's not universally socially acceptable, chances are you shouldn't push it for the time being. Times will change and so will people's opinions on what is and isn't socially acceptable. I don't know where you're from, but where I'm from people aren't exactly very smart or accepting. I personally don't think it's worth it to offend them for no reason (even if they shouldn't be offended in the first place) when you could easily edit the image and make it fine. I honestly believe that in 50 years or so everyone will look back at the fact that we felt the need to censor this and laugh about it but right now there's no reason to be upset when something like this happens. You can still buy a game with the original art so there isn't a problem.

I understand that you actually do seem to have a more liberal and mature view, but at the same time, your attitude of "wait for the change to happen" will have us perpetually waiting for change. Change has to come from somewhere, somehow. If that means pushing the boundaries of "good taste", exposing people to sexuality in ways they may not be comfortable with and normalizing sexuality instead of hiding it away and painting it as somehow harmful, then that's what needs to happen. If people aren't exposed to sexuality in a positive way (i.e. not harmful, not criminal) attitudes will never change.

In the scheme of things, changing the box art is not an earthshaking event. On the other hand, it gives the conservative mindset, the ignorant, the fearful power over what other consenting adults can and cannot view. Sure, there is the "what about the children angle", but it's up to parents to control what their children are exposed to to some degree while at the same time educating and preparing them for the times when they are not under parental supervision. We can't shelter our children until the age of 21 and then thrust them into the adult world with no exposure to adult situations and materials and expect them to be able to deal with things like sexuality in a thoughtful, mature and positive manner.

In the end, the box art change says that a certain mindset still has the power to rule over everyone, regardless of whether or not we all agree with that mindset. It takes away the power of choice, which in my opinion is never a good thing. I'm glad that the option to buy the racier versions in N. America is still available for those who choose it.

i read somewhere a while ago that the covers were changed for some retailers only, the rest will still have the original japanese covers.

Zac Smith:
But this stuff is ok?

http://www.the-other-view.com/images/xbladesbox.jpg

Try again, that's not the US boxart. This is:
http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/9/2009/02/xblades_north_american.jpg

Anyway, I'll just go to Amazon where I buy my games anyway and get a choice of what art I want. HINT: It won't be the censored one.

It's a miracle in itself that the game is actually launching here, but this whole box art thing is rather silly.

I thought it was rather obvious to the retailers what they were getting into, but I guess not.

mjc0961:

Zac Smith:
But this stuff is ok?

http://www.the-other-view.com/images/xbladesbox.jpg

Try again, that's not the US boxart. This is:
http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/9/2009/02/xblades_north_american.jpg

Anyway, I'll just go to Amazon where I buy my games anyway and get a choice of what art I want. HINT: It won't be the censored one.

Well I guess that's the difference between me here in the UK and you in the States then, seems we're little more laid back here

Already had mine imported. Though i'll most likely get an english version, slap on the japanese cover, and give the japanese game to my friend and just keep the english version.

Zac Smith:

mjc0961:

Zac Smith:
But this stuff is ok?

http://www.the-other-view.com/images/xbladesbox.jpg

Try again, that's not the US boxart. This is:
http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/9/2009/02/xblades_north_american.jpg

Anyway, I'll just go to Amazon where I buy my games anyway and get a choice of what art I want. HINT: It won't be the censored one.

Well I guess that's the difference between me here in the UK and you in the States then, seems we're little more laid back here

Nah, I wouldn't say that. Remember Ubisoft's We Dare? Remember how people in the UK made such a huge stink over it that Ubisoft decided not to release the game there? You guys over there can be just as prudish as people here sometimes. More actually, because We Dare wasn't anywhere near as bad as the Catherine box art (not that I personally think the Catherine box art is bad, but at least I can see why some people would want it censored).

Why don't they just make it reversible? Close up image on the outside, original on the inside. That's solve the problem nicely.

Onyx Oblivion:

playing an Atlus game on an Xbox would feel...WRONG.

Wrong is not the word just downright unthinkable and horrifying is what id say I just cant imigine it off a Sony system.

OT: Im excited for this game and getting the Love is Over Version and I find this whole show all the gore and brutality but give any sexualized showing and OH GOD THINK OF THE CHILDREN.

Hulyen:
Why don't they just make it reversible? Close up image on the outside, original on the inside. That's solve the problem nicely.

360 and PS3 cases are see-through, especially the PS3 ones. People would open their game and see the uncensored artwork, and some of those people would then proceed to flip their shit over a little cleavage or some butt.

Veldie:

Onyx Oblivion:

playing an Atlus game on an Xbox would feel...WRONG.

Wrong is not the word just downright unthinkable and horrifying is what id say I just cant imigine it off a Sony system.

So you've never played any of the Trauma Center games? For shame, sir. For shame. Go find the nearest Wii you can use and start playing.

I'm sure someone already said it, but this has been known for a while. This is NOT what the box art has been changed to. It's just the way it's being used at certain retailers.

The original cover art with the game is still obtainable.

RedEyesBlackGamer:
Seriously? I find that laughable. Having a gruff looking middle aged guy pointing a sawed off shotgun at people from a poster is okay, but a hint of sexuality? Gah, offensive! Go away!

Well that's America for you,violence is ok but the second we get to sex it's time to break out the crosses and holy water. I personally pre ordered the Love is Over edition,which most likely will have the regular box art. It's a nice package and I'm glad that Atlus made the box art more accessible to most Americans.

Onyx Oblivion:
Tempted to get the 360 version for a K boxart.

But playing an Atlus game on an Xbox would feel...WRONG.

Heh, I'd get it on 360 given the choice. Unfortunately the 360 version will probably be region locked, so PS3 version it is, regardless.

To be honest, I don't think the censored version of the cover looks that bad despite it being censored. Eitherway as long as the game is untouched, who cares about the artwork.

Zom-B:
In the scheme of things, changing the box art is not an earthshaking event. On the other hand, it gives the conservative mindset, the ignorant, the fearful power over what other consenting adults can and cannot view. Sure, there is the "what about the children angle", but it's up to parents to control what their children are exposed to to some degree while at the same time educating and preparing them for the times when they are not under parental supervision. We can't shelter our children until the age of 21 and then thrust them into the adult world with no exposure to adult situations and materials and expect them to be able to deal with things like sexuality in a thoughtful, mature and positive manner.

I'm going to do the same snipping with your post to avoid having a massive wall but first I'm going to tackle this specific paragraph. Now I agree with you 100% that parents should control what their kids see and that the government should keep their noses out of what they find offensive because most of their opinions are irrelevant due to not being a part of the actual present culture for quite some time. But this isn't something that happens in the privacy of one's home. This is a public place where children will be (and be there often) and some parents simply aren't ok with that. You might say that's hypocritical, but I can't tell you how many times I've seen parents with kids look at movie posters or video game boxes and say things like "This is disgusting" or "How can you show this kind of stuff in public?" People are easily offended. This is more of a matter of trying to not have to deal with parents raising their own kids...

I know it doesn't make much sense, but I prefer keeping the peace over causing outrage for no reason. Controversy is very important, especially in today's society which is (thankfully) moving away from the outdated and backwards world of Conservatism where they feel like banning things is easier than having people choose for themselves in order to gain the votes of older people who are out of touch and easily offended (and yet claim to be for small government but that's a topic for another day). But I only believe that controversy is appropriate when... well, it's appropriate. For instance, gay pride parades are controversial to some people (read: bigots) but we live in a time where gay marriage is still considered wrong by (unfortunately) a very large amount of people. What they're doing is putting people in an uncomfortable position in order to bring up discussion. I find that completely appropriate. However, what is Catherine trying to prove by doing this?

Change can happen, but when you try to force it for no reason, you prove nothing. I try to look at the opposite side when I look at this. On our side, we see that the society that we live in is moving away from a backwards, overly religious, and easily offended one and turning into a more accepting and reasonable one where people are learning to raise their own kids rather than having everyone suffer through censorship in order to keep their children "safe." The opposing view, though, sees our side as sinful and evil and indulgent in earthly pleasures (don't laugh, I've actually heard people say this kind of stuff) and that we're trying for nothing more than shock value.

What I'm trying to say is this... we live in a backwards society. America obviously has it's priorities all wrong. But forcing sexuality into places where it doesn't need to be proves nothing and only sends a message that we are merely just trying to offend everyone to get a reaction. Change is gradual, but it can and will happen and it's happening a lot faster than it has before. It's silly to us now, but society is stubborn and doesn't like thinking for itself.

And throughout this, I've just assumed you were American which might not be the case, but it is the case for me. I'm from Tennessee, so I'm right in the Bible Belt. Wikipedia says that Nashville (more or less where I live) is "sometimes referred to as The Protestant Vatican." I see and deal with the kind of people who would sue over a nip slip every single day. This would not go over well with these people and while I understand that they aren't everyone, they make up a good majority of the population. We have to let new ideas grow on people, and we'll meet people who don't want to listen, but like I've said, change is gradual and more people will listen if we actually sit down and let societal change happen instead of trying to shove it in everyone's faces. While that does work at times, I don't feel like having a video game with sexual content on its box art sends the best message or will work in any positive way.

I honestly don't see what the big deal is. Yeah, it's a shame the box art got changed, but the game is still the same, so what the hell does it matter? And frankly, I don't think too many Americans are going to buy Catherine based on what they see on the cover as they pass it; I believe it's going to be a cult hit.

I could swear I have heard this way before.
Isn't this old news?

.

With any luck Europe won't be affected by this bullshit. Not that I'd be picky over cover art, hell, I'm not even sure if I'll get the game, god knows I've been burned before by hammy-as-fuck english dubs on japanese games before (Zone of the Enders 2 I'm looking at you). It's the double standard chickenshit many here have commented on already. "Cool! Guns, murder, guts and blood! Awesom... OH MY GOD! Is that some side boob??? Get the censorship crew in here double time!!!"

This is why I love it when Australia bans a game and we get called the demons of the industry, yet the US can't even handle some slightly raunchy box art.

I'm sick of the negative attitude towards sex in the United States.
Fact:
NEARLY EVERY MEMBER OF YOUR FAMILY'S HISTORY HAS HAD SEX AT SOME POINT IN TIME AND IN ALMOST ALL CASES, LIKED IT!
We won't move on as a society if you can't understand that Sex is good and not dirty in any way.

ramox:

acsoundwave:

Not "America", but Wal-Mart & K-Mart: they have to stock the game.

(captcha: ecomagination...?)

...just, no.

It's not Wal-Mart or the like. It is indeed a US thing. And one that will never cease to baffle me.
Nowhere else nudity and sexuality are regarded as less apropriate for minors than any kind of violence.

so yeah:

GrizzlerBorno:
Some day America will stop being such a Hypocritical prude.....

Stop being a hypocritical prude? The U.S.? Ha! Yeah, and Microsoft will stop making Halo. Ha!

(disclaimer: Post ment to spread Ha ha's not boo hoo's.):p

Meh, as long as the game will still be 2deep4 12 year olds, no one will notice it. And the angle isn't that much worse, just zoomed in, so my imagination will do the rest. As long as all the remixed Romantic-era music is still in, I'm cool.

And, now, with the power of the Healing Touch, I make my post about a multiplatform release, APPEAR!
image

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here