October 8, 2007 -
GamePolitics readers will no doubt recall the summertime controversy over the depiction of Manchester Cathedral in Resistance: Fall of Man, a PS3 shooter.
Church of England officials certainly haven't forgotten, nor do they seem inclined to forgive.
As reported by the BBC, the Resistance controversy has flared up following word that the game has been nominated for a British Academy Video Games Award. The awards program is sponsored by the British Academy of Film and Television Arts (BAFTA).
According to the BBC report, The Very Rev Rogers Govender, Dean of Manchester Cathedral, said:
It is a disgrace that Resistance: Fall of Man has been shortlisted... BAFTA should not be seen condoning such behaviour unless they are saying it is acceptable for producers to walk into historic buildings and film interiors - ignoring contracts, rights and liability.
However, BAFTA spokesperson Anne-Marie Flynn countered:
Resistance: Fall Of Man has been nominated for the PC World Gamers' Award - the only publicly-voted award in this year's ceremony. The shortlist for the Gamers' Award was effectively selected by the public, in that it comprised the top-selling games on each platform...
Comments
Dude, I really hope that was sarcasm. Otherwise you’ve been watching too much Disney and reading far too little. Quasimodo was a physically deformed, mentally retarded, violent kidnapper [potential rapist??].
I had a bit of a chuckle when I read your description.
I would also day that "rendering" a building in a game is somewhat different from these "filmings"he goes on about.
On the other hand I always laugh when I see a title like "very reverend", sounds like he has levveled up in some religious RPG.
I wonder what the next level is, Extremely reverend?
...finally proving the argument's all about the money. Oops.
/b
The inclusion of public representatives of a religion as symbols of faith, hope, and survival of the human race?
Not only do these people sound ignorant, rude, and greedy, but they are showing a horrific bias that only contributes to a widespread view of most religions and their strongest adherents as not merely out of touch with society. They also further the recently growing perception of major religions and their leaders (as opposed to the ordinary people that follow them) as blindered, their focus on selfish and irrelevant money-makers and political hot buttons instead of on things that actually matter.
God forbid they draw attention to the needs of the sick or homeless or orphans, or even mental patient assessment and treatment, when they could instead be focusing on attempts to fleece members of the video game industry for presenting a church in a positive light as a representation of hope for all humanity.
But of course, the people complaining have already proven themselves a little low on cultural comprehension by somehow mistaking this positive characterization of the church building and its role in saving humankind as "promoting violence in the church".
How many times do we have to say that the people attacking games make themselves appear willfully ignorant and mindlessly biased by decrying things about which they know nothing and for negative qualities that are entirely imagined? Oh, right, my bad--sensationalism sells way better than truth.
If it were a full film crew, with all their gear, cameras, sound equipment, several actors, etc. then permission would definitely be required, as well as contracts and insurance to cover against damage to the location, as well as inconvenience for those using the place. In this case however, where is the liability evident when the game environment was constructed from reference camcorder footage and photographs?
As far as rights go, I believe that the Cathedral has been standing so long as to make any copyright ownership null and void.
All it boils down to is "We heard about this too late to make any money from complaints which had no merit in the first place, so now we are doing our best to show this game in a bad light."
Stop whining about a little fiction that probably won't get a sequel, you are only selling more copies of the game.
Also, was the cathedral used in Eternal Darkness a real one?
Somebody get the "very reverend" a tissue.
"According to The Guardian, a spokesperson for the Church has said that the nomination is a further insult following the furore, and that the associated publicity has only helped boost sales for Sony.
"We had to resort to legal advice to get Sony to a meeting and the row... Helped sales," the spokesperson claimed.
"The game has been nominated because of how well it's done in the charts. This nomination is like rubbing salt in the wounds.""
So... in other words, if the church hadn't kicked up a fuss over it, we wouldn't be having a problem now?
It's funny how different people draw vastly different conclusions from the same data.
As to the people of the Church of England, you should read up on the seven deadly sins, an idea that I believe protestantism still holds. Read about avarice.
Once again, CHURCH OF ENGLAND IS A PROTESTANT CHURCH.
The Church of England is one of the denominations that split off from the Catholic Church back in the time of the Reformation. This is the attitude of some of the successors of Martin Luther, John Calvin, etc, not of the Catholic Church.
E. Zachary Knight
Divine Knight Gaming
OK Game Devs
Random Tower
"Once again, CHURCH OF ENGLAND IS A PROTESTANT CHURCH."
Maybe Terminator44 didn't get that far in Reformation history yet. ;)
The Church of England is a funny beast though. Born out of the strangest of circumstances and a vast mishmash of motives and influences, the English Reformation managed to strip its churches and cathedrals of anything valuable, dissolve and loot the monasteries, help cause a brutal civil war that took in the whole British Isles and turned them briefly into a republic, and finally help accelerate the transfer of power from the monarch to parliament.
Now they just bicker about video games using one of their cathedrals and which reality shows should be censored. Its probably not surprising that almost all of their membership now resides in former British colonies in Africa.
Or the short version: It was too early in the morning.
Again, I want to apologize to anyone I may have offended.
Actually, in the peroid that most historians refer to as the Reformation (1500-1650), the Anglican Church, while it officially broke with the papacy, still kept many Catholic traditions. The Elizabethan era examplifies this, as religous policy was mainly compromise between Catholics and Protestants. It would be later, during the English Civil War that the pendulum would begin to swing towards Protestants. However, the CoE itself reamains at least somewhat Catholic.
Case in point: After further reading into Anglicanism and the CoE, I discover that both decribe themselves as both "Catholic and Apostolic."
http://www.cofe.anglican.org/faith/anglican/
This remains in keeping with Anglican chruch's origins as a seperate chruch created NOT because Henry VIII disagreed with Catholicism, but simply because he needed to take control of the Church in England to get what he wanted. However, Catholic traditions were, and still are, fairly strong in the CoE. This is different from Calvinism and Lutheranism, which are the very roots of Protestantism, and therefore very unCatholic.
Finally, I just want to clarify that I am NOT biased against Catholics, Anglicians, Protestants or any other denomination of Christianity. I'm equally skeptical of all organized religon. I admit I jumped the gun with my last post. The CoE is not a true Catholic Church. However, it is just as errounues, it seems, to declare it as purely Protestant. It would seem that it is a mixture of the two.
The terminology of the subject can get awfully confusing when taken in at once. I'm sure your teacher wants to keep those problems to a minimum by relying on some continuous terms that are more technically accurate (catholic=universal rather than Roman Catholic) than those used in common definitions. And I'd be surprised if anyone got offended.
Bravo on the details! Just to clarify, I was agreeing that your original post was not as out of sync as it might seem, due to difficulties in making quick definitions for complex institutions.
This has nothing really to do with how gory or violent the game is (R* could submit as many cut versions as they want, the result will always be the same), it has totally to do with our Government worried that after Manhunt's controversy (that lie about the game being owned by the killer of a 14 year old) they will face even more angry mum's and tabloid newspapers.
I doubt we'll ever see Manhunt 2 here, and I can foresee more bans coming in the future - look out GTA 4...
... in other news, the BBFC still believes it okay to see realistic gore and violence in films so will continue not to cut those in anyway. Castration will be fine when seen with real people, but not when animated.
Yeah. That's probably the last point in history where the United States of America could be stopped. After that it was just too late.
@RichD
In Europe, people only put up with bollocks like that for so long. After that, it's time to light the torches.
I'm willing to tell the story, should anyone be interested.
the spirit of the UK people has been destroyed over the last 10 years of do-gooding Labour, so I doubt we'll see much of any uproar over this latest bit of injustice. Shame really, as I did fancy showing members of the BBFC the difference between animated castration and the real thing...
But then, the teenagers can. They rebel, and they will destroy the government. Someday.
Can we please get that Government conspiracy crap out of the way when talking about the BBFC and Manhunt 2...
There, he said it. Its about cash.