September 11, 2007 -
Readers of GamePolitics won't soon forget the controversy over the use of Manchester Cathedral in PS3 launch hit, Resistance: Fall of Man.
Over at Gamasutra, Georgia Tech prof and Persuasive Games CEO Ian Bogost pens a spirited defense of the famed structure's depiction in the game:
...For my part, I think the cathedral creates one of the only significant experiences in the whole game, one steeped in reverence for the cathedral and the church, rather than desecration.
...Video games frequently recreate real cities as settings... major cities provide a built-in context for gameplay... Manchester Cathedral cements this sense of place in the game. The cathedral is an impressive monument, a marker of cultural and social heritage with a long history.
...The game’s detailed, accurate recreation of the cathedral, as well its separation in its own special level, encourages the player to pay attention to the structure... It is not Sony or [developer] Insomniac who defile the Manchester Cathedral in Resistance: Fall of Man. It is the Chimera who do...
Yes, the player must discharge his weapons inside the church to avoid defeat. But when the dust settles, the cathedral empties, and the player is left to spend as much or as little time as he wants exploring the cavernous interior of the cathedral, which survives the barrage, much like the real Manchester Cathedral survived a German bomb attack during World War II.
...Resistance adds a fictional homage to the church’s resolve, this time in an alternate history fraught by an enemy that neither understands nor cares for human practices like religion. And it survives this as well.
GP: Good stuff from Ian, although his contention that the Chimera defile the Cathedral stretches the point a bit. After all, who created the Chimera?
In any event, it's clear that in the U.K. the Resistance controversy has hurt the game industry politically, at least in the short run.
Comments
Man, I hated the stain glass challenge. It took me forever to shoot out all those windows. I think the French might just have a better understanding of setting in storytelling.
it's just a shame that video game companies will be put off from setting anything in manchester now :(
And the fact that Manchester wanted money seals the deal, no matter how they call it. Donation? Hmm... One can't really help but speculate.
of course, these are the same types of people who hide their child molesters from justice and participated in some of the historically worst events of mankind.
Thats like saying it's illegal to draw a picture of something bad happening in a church.
I know a lot of RPGs have temples and pseudo-churches (and sometimes buddhist temples), but cathedrals and real churches (and synagogues, and mosques, etc...) would be even better.
Agreed.
It was such a sham and I feel bad that the game industry actually gave in, I mean since when is it illegal to depict something in art form? (Granted games as art is still in debate)
It seems like everyone is coming out of the wood work for their new scapegoat.
if Resistance was claiming to be non-fiction (yes, i'm fully aware there're aliens involved) THEN i could understand that the peeps should be concerned.
Yeah, those challenges were hell. I see what you mean about the french though. I mean, they have videogame characters on stamps over there! They know what it's all about!
Notre Dame also appeared in the Paris level of Twisted Metal 2 and possibly Twisted Metal world Tour on the PSP
They can go on about how the church is depicted in a respectful way once you're in there splattering people all over it's walls in the defense, but the contention doesn't even really address things that far into it.
Personally, I don't mind it, but not for a second do I believe that the execs don't realize this. They're just trying to salvage the last bit of even marginally positive light from this PR disaster.
Easiest, or most common way anyway, seems to be to twist the issue around.
"The act of degrading a holy place to the point of being mere casual/ mindless/ relaxing entertainment is the issue here.
They can go on about how the church is depicted in a respectful way once you’re in there splattering people all over it’s walls in the defense, but the contention doesn’t even really address things that far into it."
I don't get it. How is a firefight (with aliens, no less) somehow desecrating the church as a "holy place"?
1. It isn't being done ritualistically. There is no pagan or blasphemous context to the violence.
2. The player isn't trying to kill clergy, worshippers, or anyone else that might be construed as a "religious target".
3. The player isn't destroying religious artifacts or symbols or otherwise showing contempt for the beliefs of the cathedral's faith.
4. As someone else mentioned, the actual Manchester Cathedral has already seen its fair share of violence. If someone were to recreate the German bombing, for example, in a video game...would that somehow be disrespectful or degrading?
This is pretty ridiculous, to be honest. Personally, I feel they should be allowed to do damn near anything they want in a DIGITAL DEPICTION of a real cathedral. The fact that they're not even doing anything reasonably "disrespectful" and still receiving flak over it...
Really disappointing.
Look, the Church of England wasn’t told about the context. They were’nt even told you were shooting Chimera.
They were told about the context before they started complaining, it wasn't the inclusion of the church they're objecting to, but the fact that there's a firefight inside their church.
They're using the "illegal reproduction" angle because "you're depicting a fictional scenario" isn't exactly lawsuit material...
Bogost mentions that the legality is murky, but from what I know of British copyright law, it's 100% legal. British copyright does extend to architecture, but there's a few quirks. First is that the last modification to the church was more than 50 years ago, so the copyright would have expired anyway. Renovations are specifically listed in the copyright act as "not counting". And the copyright laws specifically exempt non-building reproductions, like photos and paintings. The best the church can do is ask you to leave if you try to take photos of the interior for the digital version, but it's not illegal.
And what's the problem with having a fire fight inside of a church? A ****ing war is going on; I think the fact that the building is of a religion is one of the least things you could possibly complain about.
Random Fan Artist #458939: "Hey, look! I drew this really cool picture! It shows Max Payne shooting thugs in the Vatican!"
JT: "I have the mind to put you away for a LOOONG time, McGinnity. DAMN YOU, ROCKSTAR! YOU AND YOUR VIOLENT GAMES AND YOUR MARKETING TO KIDS! I'LL GET YOU SOME DAY! HOOAH!"
Later, in the interrogation room:
Random White Police Officer #4784337: "Good God, this is a fucked-up drawing. What's that man doing? Hiding behind a pew, reloading a shotgun-- I THINK HE'S LITTERING! I swear to God, he threw that coffee cup there."
Random Fan Artist #458939: "How can you discern that? It's only an illustration! Max doesn't even LIKE coffee!"
Random White Police Officer #4784337: "SHUT UP, NURD! What if I told your parents you drew this crap for kicks, huh, you sick bastard? Here, you sign this false confession. We'll put you away for life, and maybe we'll grant you a full pardon when you're dead."
And how much time passed before church officials started to criticize it?
As soon as they heard one of the levels was to use the Manchester Cathedral. They didn't waste any time complaining as I recall.
Movies have had churches (Governator of California was in a movie featuring one), nobody complains then.
It wasn't a particular real-world church as I recall. I think it's just because it's not set 100% in a fictional world that they think they have a case. If it's a fictional "christian" church, they can't do much, but if it's clearly based on a real-world church, they figure they can complain.
Seems like we have a bunch of knee-jerk reactionary conservatives who got their misbehavin' done in the 60's-70's, and after that kinda swung back towards all this election (moral values nonsense); kinda gave way to a more agnostic generation. Kind that believes in ethical relativism.
Put simply - it wouldn't surprise me in the least if the younger members of the clergy of england don't see it as the threat the elder members do. Frankly, it reminds me of when "Last temptation of christ" came out. People were screaming "blaspheme", left and right, and as I recall I remember seeing a quickly glossed over interview with at least one church official who actually took the time to see the movie. He said something to the effect of, "actually, I didn't think it was that bad."
I thought the Church of England originally got started because of Henry VIII. He was having trouble conceiving a male heir, and wanted a divorce from his wife of the time. The vatican wouldn't give it to him. So of course, the only logical repsonse, is "@#$@#$ you, I'll make my own church".
Fast wind through to today - and I find it very difficult to be sympathetic with a church that got started because Henry 8th wanted a divorce - wants to take the so-called "moral high ground"?
By all means, if I'm butchering the history - feel free to correct me. It's been a while since I've looked at european history. Much less history of the catholic church.
Fast wind through to today - and I find it very difficult to be sympathetic with a church that got started because Henry 8th wanted a divorce - wants to take the so-called “moral high ground”?
Partially. He also didn't like the idea of Rome "owning" parts of England (church ground). So it was also a turf issue. Although considering what catholics did to try to get England back under Rome's rule... I don't think either side had the moral high ground.
Um.. Since release. It recieved at least in the mid-eights almost everywhere. X-Play gave it a 5/5.
(Granted I can't speak from experience, but... well, yeah, where have you been for the past year?)
But back on topic, We all know the COE just wanted a cut. What we dont know is if they REALLY expected one, or just felt like making asshats out of themselves.
Anyway. Isn't this a fairly public and well-known building? What were the people threatening, anyway, to sue the makers of Resistance? I never did hear if they were actually threatening anything, just sorely disapproving.
Who cares about politics anyway. The best art is usually that which offends.
they threatened to sue if it wasn't pulled off the shelves or edited, and they wanted Sony to give them money.
What they do once they're actually in the game is irrelevant.
You wouldn't expect them to allow someone to play tennis inside the church, even if it were some sort of "Tennis for God" Championship, let alone something that they have spoken out against (Violent Video games).
It's the simple matter of that they don't wish people to be able to do things like that in their holy place, regardless of weather or not it's in the virtual world.
As much as I despise this analogy, think of the old stories of the stereotypical tribal person being afraid of having their picture taken.
They view it as a tremendously wrong/ unnatural thing to do to someone, so you don't take their picture.
It doesn't matter what you want to use the picture for.
As I said before, I don't agree with them, the church is a part of our history and our world. People should be allowed to represent it in anything or any way they want. But at least try to understand that saying you're being respectful once it's actually inside the game doesn't mean a thing.
No, the church of England is a Protestant church. Not Catholic at all.
It's basically Catholicism, only with the Archbishop & King as church head instead of the Pope. But procedurally, the Anglican sect is a lot closer to Roman Catholic than it is to North American protestantism.
@Nebslox
The thing is though, that they seem to have no problem with churches being depicted in war movies as being bombed, used as cover, with snipers hiding in the bell tower, etc., because that's "historic"...
So really, why now?
We are thankful for that. It's the reason I never set foot in American Churches.
A few days after Resistance was recognised as the first Million-Seller game for the PS3. Sad how a Reverand (Govender) got greedy.
"September 11th, 2007 at 9:21 am
This whole thing was a non-issue in the first place: The church just wanted $$ from the games industry.
Well how else are they supposed to pay of all those raped children coming forward and sueing them?
The church should shut up and go away before games start depicting the things that really go on in some churches...I wonder how the church would react if one of those molested children wrote a game about going into churches and slaughtering all the priests and those who try to protect them...
Not only that but you could torch the Mona lisa and other famous paintings while in the Notre Dame (at least in TM2). In fact they would even reveal a cheat code if you torched them all.
But I said it before, if insomniac somehow lost this case all they would hav to do is modify the church a bit to make it a parody of the manchester cathedral, or a church "inspired by" the manchester cathedral.
On topic - were they asking for money? or were they just outraged? I couldn't support either.