Chinese Govt. Blocking Release of WoW: Wrath of the Lich King
Chinese Govt. Blocking Release of WoW: Wrath of the Lich King
March 11, 2009
World of Warcraft expansion Wrath of the Lich King has encountered some bureaucratic stumbling blocks on its way to the lucrative Chinese market.
JLM Pacific Epoch reports that WLK has been rejected twice by Chinese regulatory officials:
The applications were rejected due to content that didn't meet requirements, including a city raid and skeleton characters; the submitted version did not contain WLK's Death Knight first hero class, said the insider.
WoW game developer Blizzard Entertainment recently deleted a link on the game's North American site to the site's simplified Chinese version, said the report.
And, as Massively notes:
World of Warcraft has undergone changes specific to the Chinese market in the past, namely removing skeletons altogether in order to receive approval to operate the game in mainland China.
A PUBLICATION OF THE ECA
SUBSCRIBE
LOGINGamePolitics ShoutBox
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:00pm
Valdearg: Story about a Male to Female TG who was expressly told she wouldn't be given a job because she was TG. Its not the main point of the story, but explicit, perfectly legal discrimination like this exists.
Valdearg: Story about a Male to Female TG who was expressly told she wouldn't be given a job because she was TG. Its not the main point of the story, but explicit, perfectly legal discrimination like this exists.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:53pm
Valdearg: Lol, I don't know. It may very well be legal to do so. Though that might able to fall under the "race" restriction, depending on how that point is argued.
Valdearg: Lol, I don't know. It may very well be legal to do so. Though that might able to fall under the "race" restriction, depending on how that point is argued.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:51pm
Valdearg: I don't think they do have any legal recourse. I'll have to dig around, but I seriously believe that if the law doesn't specifically mention Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity, they can still be discriminated against in those 29 states.
Valdearg: I don't think they do have any legal recourse. I'll have to dig around, but I seriously believe that if the law doesn't specifically mention Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity, they can still be discriminated against in those 29 states.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:51pm
Andrew Eisen: Eye color isn't covered either but I doubt it would be considered legal to refuse to hire people with green eyes.
Andrew Eisen: Eye color isn't covered either but I doubt it would be considered legal to refuse to hire people with green eyes.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:48pm
Andrew Eisen: My explanation is longer than the Shoutbox will allow. Suffice to say that while those who are discriminated against do have legal recourse, anti-discrimination law should specifically cite sexual orientation so that there’s no question about it.
Andrew Eisen: My explanation is longer than the Shoutbox will allow. Suffice to say that while those who are discriminated against do have legal recourse, anti-discrimination law should specifically cite sexual orientation so that there’s no question about it.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:42pm
Valdearg: "There is no federal law that consistently protects LGBT individuals from employment discrimination; it remains legal in 29 states, and in 38 states to do so based on gender identity or expression." From the Human Rights Campaign.
Valdearg: "There is no federal law that consistently protects LGBT individuals from employment discrimination; it remains legal in 29 states, and in 38 states to do so based on gender identity or expression." From the Human Rights Campaign.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:40pm
Valdearg: @AE: Why don't you think I'm correct? I know Wiki could be flawed, but as far as it says, its up to date as of June 2009.
Valdearg: @AE: Why don't you think I'm correct? I know Wiki could be flawed, but as far as it says, its up to date as of June 2009.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:39pm
Andrew Eisen: I don't think you're right but I really don't know and don't have the time to find out. However things actually are, it's very clear how they actually should be.
Andrew Eisen: I don't think you're right but I really don't know and don't have the time to find out. However things actually are, it's very clear how they actually should be.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:34pm
Valdearg: "just because there's no specific state level protection for it, doesn't make discrimination right or legal." I would disagree. If there's no laws against it, it makes it perfectly legal. It's definitely not right, but perfectly legal to do.
Valdearg: "just because there's no specific state level protection for it, doesn't make discrimination right or legal." I would disagree. If there's no laws against it, it makes it perfectly legal. It's definitely not right, but perfectly legal to do.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:33pm
Valdearg: Meaning in 29 states, private sector discrimination against gays is perfectly legal.. Sickening.
Valdearg: Meaning in 29 states, private sector discrimination against gays is perfectly legal.. Sickening.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:33pm
Valdearg: 19 states have no protections, and another 10 only have protections for public sector jobs.
Valdearg: 19 states have no protections, and another 10 only have protections for public sector jobs.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:32pm
Andrew Eisen: Well, most businesses have equal rights policies in place and just because there's no specific state level protection for it, doesn't make discrimination right or legal. Still, no argument against adding such protections.
Andrew Eisen: Well, most businesses have equal rights policies in place and just because there's no specific state level protection for it, doesn't make discrimination right or legal. Still, no argument against adding such protections.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:28pm
Valdearg: More information. Apparently, it's worse than I actually thought.
Valdearg: More information. Apparently, it's worse than I actually thought.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:28pm
Valdearg: Check the link. Apparently, its more like 20 states that have no protections.
Valdearg: Check the link. Apparently, its more like 20 states that have no protections.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:26pm
Andrew Eisen: In the US? Not that I'm aware of. Sad if true.
Andrew Eisen: In the US? Not that I'm aware of. Sad if true.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:25pm
Valdearg: @AE: Actually, I think, at least for now, businesses can still discriminate against gays in a few states.. Something like 5 or 8. Its part of why Gay Rights Advocates are in support of the Employee Nondiscrimination Act, or ENDA.
Valdearg: @AE: Actually, I think, at least for now, businesses can still discriminate against gays in a few states.. Something like 5 or 8. Its part of why Gay Rights Advocates are in support of the Employee Nondiscrimination Act, or ENDA.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:22pm
Valdearg: @AE: And that's fine. Official "Church" functions are fine, despite the fact that it's discrimination, it's what I guess I would consider "acceptable" discrimination, despite the fact that I hate to use "acceptable" to define it.
Valdearg: @AE: And that's fine. Official "Church" functions are fine, despite the fact that it's discrimination, it's what I guess I would consider "acceptable" discrimination, despite the fact that I hate to use "acceptable" to define it.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:21pm
Valdearg: What's stopping someone from working with the church to declare a Catholic Corporation, that would retain it's "right" to discriminate against non-Catholics?
Valdearg: What's stopping someone from working with the church to declare a Catholic Corporation, that would retain it's "right" to discriminate against non-Catholics?
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:20pm
Valdearg: Let me ask you this. What defines something as "catholic"? There are Catholic Schools, Churchs, Charities, and even law firms.
Valdearg: Let me ask you this. What defines something as "catholic"? There are Catholic Schools, Churchs, Charities, and even law firms.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:20pm
Andrew Eisen: Indeed. You can restrict the membership of your private club however you see fit. However, a business can't refuse to hire someone based on sexual orientation.
Andrew Eisen: Indeed. You can restrict the membership of your private club however you see fit. However, a business can't refuse to hire someone based on sexual orientation.
Copyright © 2007 ECA. All rights reserved.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Comments
This is probably either ;
A) China's usual pattern; the govt. posses every last bit of power to be had in the country, and if the citizens disagree with it's decisions, jail/execution time!
B) An actual effort to fight gold farming?
Skeletons.
FUCKING SKELETONS.
WHO WOULD BAN SKELETONS?
I HAVEN'T HEARD ANY CENSORSHIP OF SKELETONS.
This had better be some "gold farming block" disguised as a "censorship content", because I will give up on China if this is not the case.
| XBOX LIVE GamerTag: Harry Miste | Steam ID: Harry Miste | PSN ID: HarryMiste |
WHO WOULD BAN SKELETONS?
The Chinese, obviously. The visible bones of undead player characters have already been removed from Chinese versions of the game on its original release, so this isn't all that surprising. It all comes down to cultural differences. I'm German, our politicians ban violence and swastikas, whereas the US has issues with nudity and views on gun laws that appear downright bizarre to me. The Chinese have issues with skeletons, so they ban that - in the end, it's the same everywhere.
I remember a news post somewhere - I think GP covered it - about Japan not allowing Dead Space due to the use of 'spirits' and ghosts in the game, but that turned out to be fake, possibly made up by someone in marketing or fabricated somehow.
Likewise, this incident with WOTLK can't be a cultural decision, surely? There were skeletons in the original game but apparently they were removed, in which case what on earth were they replaced with? Ghouls? Generic humans?
The Chinese have always been against the representation of skeletons or undead in media (probably has to do with ancestor worship or something).
I remember that, mabye as early as 10 years ago, Magic: The Gathering cards released in China had alternate artwork. (http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/misc/16527_Insider_Trading_8_Foreign_... -scroll down to #6)
There was an interesting article on this, with comparisons, on the WotC site, but I can't find it anymore.
China: Trying to conquer the world one day at a time. First that U.S. ship they claim was in their waters (they think they own the whole fucking Pacific), silencing the people of Tibet on the 50th anniversary of them being douchebags, and now this.
When Jack Thompson runs his mouth, does anyone really care what he has to say anymore?
Don't forget the 1200 people still missing after the riots a while ago. (How long ago was that, before the Olympics?)
@ Michael Chandra
oh, let's not forget about the genocide in Tibet, and how the government kidnapped Falu Gong Practioner by killing them and harvested and selling the organ to the black market. Let's also not forget they send some of their "hardware" to Sudan to help with more killing in Darfur. Last but not least:
-they ban Command & Conquer: Generals (like that game a lot), just because it has China in there. So how come USA hasn't complained about the game (I know US made it).
How do you get rid of skeletons in something named after a Lich?
You can't and that is why they banned the whole expansion.
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma
I wonder why they don't even have info about the Chinese version of WoW, period, on their site anymore? Maybe they decided to stop bothering?
While I am too pissed off at this ,the WoW logo looks badass in that writing.
Just one more reason I'm glad I live the US
So does this mean they didnt have a Dub of Evil Dead in China?
---------------------------------
"Don't Run, You'll Just Die Tired."
Skeletons aside, I wonder why a city raid would be involved in this round. The raid targets have been there since launch, is it only that it's a specific goal with rewards for completing, and not just a late night passtime for raiding guilds?
Probably.. having the freedom to run around and lay waste to cities wasn't an official goal or reward-bearing event. Even then, it was probably inching towards "red flag" (no pun intended) territory. Now, it's more akin to breaking into a full sprint.. can't have the youngsters putting thoughts of tiananmen-style rebellion together with city raid coordination, can we?
"Life sucks, get a fuckin helmet" - Denis Leary
That "city raid" will probably be the Culling of Stratholme event in Caverns of Time.