Sony is now banning Visual Novels

[CrookedCroc]

"All communications and submissions between game companies and Sony are now filtered through their California branch, in English – not just the censorship, any complaints about the censorship now have to go through the team performing the censorship"

Now the Vita is extra dead lol

Sources:
archive.fo: Sony banning Visual Novel Ports to the PS4 Devs banned from discussin…

archive.fo: Sony prohibited devs from announcing their game would undergo censors…

 

[Misha Bordiga Zahradník]

Are you fucking me?!

 

[Slytherin Umbreon]

Are you fucking me?!

No, that's kind of the opposite of what's happening.

 

[Casey Fluffbat]

I don't follow visual novels, but I can relate to what's happening here. Sucks when they toss the whole apple away, making enemies with the consumer.

No, that's kind of the opposite of what's happening.

Don't crush his dreams. :L

 

[CrookedCroc]

Are you fucking me?!

I wish.
I don't really like VNs but banning them is something beyond stupid. I don't know why the Sony HQ lets Sony California do all of this, the Sony platforms are supposed to be weeb oriented and they are now alienating their biggest audiences

 

[Slytherin Umbreon]

I don't know why the Sony HQ lets Sony California do all of this

I don't know why Sony Cali's doing this. I thought they'd be more nerdy/dirty/anime/weeb.

 

[CrookedCroc]

I don't know why Sony Cali's doing this. I thought they'd be more nerdy/dirty/anime/weeb.

Maybe they think that some of the anime tropes are too problematic or something like that

 

[Misha Bordiga Zahradník]

Maybe they think that some of the anime tropes are too problematic or something like that

It's pr0n backlash, based on the mention of censoring. There's also a lot of people that hate animesque for no real reason; and to them liking it makes you a weeb.

 

[Sagt]

I'm pretty sure that a lot of the things you quoted from that post were either speculative, or just untrue. I could be wrong about that, but I think I'm probably right - I didn't see any sources whatsoever on that information afterall, and there were just some mentions of 'reports' of it happening without specifics. I got the impression that people were just taking the suggestions of people in the discussion pages as a fact of reality.

I was trying to find the original source for this information, because I was curious, but they kept linking back to other discussion pages, as source material. The only thing I found was a YouTube video of a game developer saying (in Japanese) that their game was delayed from being released until 2019 (according to other people in the discussion, since I cannot understand Japanese) because of some tougher regulations that had been put in place.

I couldn't find any source for visual novels or ports being outright banned, or of discussion of this 'censorship' being banned either. Or, of there even being censorship in the first place, beyond what is generally accepted as necessary.

The only thing I could see that seemed like it might be true is that the Playstation is moving from the Japanese rating system to the American one (or something along those lines. Maybe they're just adding new regulations, though, when considering what to approve), which is more strict with video games with pornographic depictions of underage characters (the reason OMEGA Labyrinth and Senran Kagura Burst Re:Newal weren't allowed on Sony's platform without being altered beforehand).

A lot of people were suggesting that they might have changed their regulations so that they could break into the Chinese market.

 

[ZeroVoidTime]

It's pr0n backlash, based on the mention of censoring. There's also a lot of people that hate animesque for no real reason; and to them liking it makes you a weeb.

I.E. PROTECT OUR CHILDREN! This has to be the cheap and shallow reason to ban visual novels as parents should be able to moderate what their children views. That and it is socially degrading that companies plus government doing their jobs for them just to win moral guardian points.

 

[Yakamaru]

Banning visual novels? Time to get a decent enough PC?

 

[Misha Bordiga Zahradník]

I'm pretty sure that a lot of the things you quoted from that post were either speculative, or just untrue. I could be wrong about that, but I think I'm probably right - I didn't see any sources whatsoever on that information afterall, and there were just some mentions of 'reports' of it happening without specifics. I got the impression that people were just taking the suggestions of people in the discussion pages as a fact of reality.

I was trying to find the original source for this information, because I was curious, but they kept linking back to other discussion pages, as source material. The only thing I found was a YouTube video of a game developer saying (in Japanese) that their game was delayed from being released until 2019 (according to other people in the discussion, since I cannot understand Japanese) because of some tougher regulations that had been put in place.

I couldn't find any source for visual novels or ports being outright banned, or of discussion of this 'censorship' being banned either. Or, of there even being censorship in the first place, beyond what is generally accepted as necessary.

The only thing I could see that seemed like it might be true is that the Playstation is moving from the Japanese rating system to the American one (or something along those lines. Maybe they're just adding new regulations, though, when considering what to approve), which is more strict with video games with pornographic depictions of underage characters (the reason OMEGA Labyrinth and Senran Kagura Burst Re:Newal weren't allowed on Sony's platform without being altered beforehand).

A lot of people were suggesting that they might have changed their regulations so that they could break into the Chinese market.

Thanks for being a voice of reason.

 

[DimskyTheOwl]

......If it's coming from that subreddit "kotaku in action" it's more than likely being taken out of context and heavily exggerated.

 

[Stratelier]

Some of these terms don't sound unreasonable at all.

If Sony's California office is responsible for all localization/censorship of US releases on their platforms, it MAKES SENSE for any criticism of their process to go straight to them.

Forbidding developers from allowing a censored version of a game to self-identify it as such? I actually agree with this idea, to have the censored version stand on its own even if the uncensored version is allowed to advertise itself as such. For comparison, if an artist uploads two versions of a piece to FA -- one censored (general) and one uncensored (adult) -- I actually kinda hate it if the artist tags the former as "clean version" because the mere presence of that tag at all confirms that the latter version exists.

Also, the mere genre label of "visual novel" to begin with. Like the MPAA's old "X" rating, it's probably become too typecast as "romance/girlfriend/sex simulator" to be redeemed.

 

[Misha Bordiga Zahradník]

Some of these terms don't sound unreasonable at all.

If Sony's California office is responsible for all localization/censorship of US releases on their platforms, it MAKES SENSE for any criticism of their process to go straight to them.

Forbidding developers from allowing a censored version of a game to self-identify it as such? I actually agree with this idea, to have the censored version stand on its own even if the uncensored version is allowed to advertise itself as such. For comparison, if an artist uploads two versions of a piece to FA -- one censored (general) and one uncensored (adult) -- I actually kinda hate it if the artist tags the former as "clean version" because the mere presence of that tag at all confirms that the latter version exists.

Also, the mere genre label of "visual novel" to begin with. Like the MPAA's old "X" rating, it's probably become too typecast as "romance/girlfriend/sex simulator" to be redeemed.

I'll admit there is a lack of credibility to the article, but gag orders on censorship are always a bad idea. Furthermore, theres nothing wrong with indicating a clean version as such, especially when you have audiences with varrying tastes. Some people want smut, some don't.

As for VNs being "irredeemable"; many of the same criticisms are levied at the furry fandom despite stastics indicating most furry content is sfw by a long margin. But we still get the wrap of being sexual deviant perverts.

There are games that should be censored because they flagrantly include loli bullshit, which really shouldn't be a thing. That's understandable. But if Sony was to actually be banning VNs, they'd be throwing a lot of inoffensive content under the same bus. And we are talking the kind of stories that have inspired famous animes.

 

[TrishaCat]

This is a rumor
They're only banning VNs that were originally 18+; anything else regarding VNs is speculatory and just sourced from KiA (a very volatile and exaggeratory subreddit), and I say that as someone who LOATHES Sony's recent censorship requirements on recent games (Omega Labyrinth Z, Senran Kagura Burst ReNewal, Nekopara, Date A Live Rio Reincarnation, Dragon Star Varnir, and maybe Mary Skelter 2)

Drop your pitchforks. Slightly.

 

[TrishaCat]

Also: www.change.org: Sign the Petition

 

[Stratelier]

I'll admit there is a lack of credibility to the article, but gag orders on censorship are always a bad idea. Furthermore, theres nothing wrong with indicating a clean version as such, especially when you have audiences with varrying tastes. Some people want smut, some don't.

I don't know of any company spending the effort to produce a voluntary 'clean' version and marketing it as such, and it's obvious copyright violation when fans try to do it themselves. Conversely, you do not have to look far for examples of advertised 'unrated/uncut' versions.

As for VNs being "irredeemable"; many of the same criticisms are levied at the furry fandom despite stastics indicating most furry content is sfw by a long margin. But we still get the wrap of being sexual deviant perverts.

Yep, that's why I said "probably". It's a war of connotations, not definitions.

And as an aside, I just hate the term "visual" novel. Sounds too ambiguous with "graphic novel" which is definitely not the same thing; I'd much rather call it an "interactive novel" because, when you think about their typical game design, that's what they are.

 

[Misha Bordiga Zahradník]

I don't know of any company spending the effort to produce a voluntary 'clean' version and marketing it as such, and it's obvious copyright violation when fans try to do it themselves. Conversely, you do not have to look far for examples of advertised 'unrated/uncut' versions.


Yep, that's why I said "probably". It's a war of connotations, not definitions.

And as an aside, I just hate the term "visual" novel. Sounds too ambiguous with "graphic novel" which is definitely not the same thing; I'd much rather call it an "interactive novel" because, when you think about their typical game design, that's what they are.

Because the clean version is the standard version in a lot of markets. The music industry is prime example, where there definitions are switched. There is a clean or radio friendly version, and the uncensored version of songs.

 

[Stratelier]

Because the clean version is the standard version in a lot of markets. The music industry is prime example, where there definitions are switched. There is a clean or radio friendly version, and the uncensored version of songs.

Agreed. Though it's unlikely that they made the clean version without some kind of mandate (publisher, etc.) telling them to do so....

 

[Misha Bordiga Zahradník]

Agreed. Though it's unlikely that they made the clean version without some kind of mandate (publisher, etc.) telling them to do so....

That's true, but we can see that clean versions have a valid place in conjuction with non clean works. It is wrong to say an censored version should not exist because it implies the existence of the uncensored version, because such censorship is either:
A. For an alternative audience.
B. Required by rule\law to make the product legal, sometimes for good reason. Otherwise, the work would not exist in any form.

The question then becomes; how and when should censorship be justified when it is not undertaken for the purpose of adressing different sub demographics by the artist?

Which is a tough question, though I personally think content depicting clearly minor non-existing characters in a sexual manner has negative impacts in adressing certain paraphalias as a society. Thus, such content should probably be censored. Though I'm more worried about willful viewers of such content being mandated to seek mental help than crusading to take it down.

Regular porn is a harder debate for censorship, and I'm honestly not sure where I stand, except that personal consumption or dedicated porn distribution should not be obstructed, but should probably be clearly indicated as pornographic, containing porn, and not have the contained content on public display.

Nudity and porn are differentiated by intent and design. Porn is intended to purposefully stimulate a sexual response for the enjoyment of the viewer(s), and is designed to do so. Artwork can feature full on nudity and not be pornographic in nature.

 

[Stratelier]

That's true, but we can see that clean versions have a valid place in conjuction with non clean works. It is wrong to say an censored version should not exist because it implies the existence of the uncensored version

I never said that; if anything, only that it's wrong to advertise the censored version as such (which is more or less what was originally claimed). It's bad marketing to let your consumer know they are getting the 'inferior' version of the product.

Spoiler

though if the ulterior motive is to entice people to buy the uncensored version...

As for my comparing it to clean/adult versions on FA, it's more a personal preference. I don't have any more problems with artists making multiple editions of the same piece than I do with just explicit content in general. So it just niggles me to see a clean version tagged as such because if that was the only edition of the piece, there would be no reason to give it that tag in the first place, right?