1. Maiheko says:

    Ah man, I just can’t take any more delays of this game…Thank you, Penny Arcade, for putting it in such a light perspective. And yeah, that’s a pretty "colorful" idea for a level design, having your Sackboy fly right into a simulation of the Twin Towers.


    When you die in "Dead Space," no one can hear you scream.

  2. Shadow Darkman Anti-Thesis of Jack Thompson says:

    Need a FacePalm here too, Turnip.



  3. kagirinai says:

    "thank you and the other posters for not going "flame mode" on my posts"
    It’s sad that you feel compelled to thank us for doing what any civilized people should do. Ironically, that in itself is a comment on user created content.

    "It concerns me when I see companies going ape trying to make sure they don’t offend anyone when no matter how hard you try you will offend someone."
    Sure, but it’s still the company’s decision to make. They’re allowed to make an environment and then police it however they see fit — everyone has the same outlets for freespeech; if LittleBigPlanet is insufficiently free, then there’s the internet, television, radio, print, soapboxes, and any number of other methods. Ultimately, if someone wants to say something in LittleBigPlanet that Media Molecule and Sony don’t want them to say, then their alternative is to make their own game and say it there.

    I would be agreeing with your outrage if it were governmental forces at work, but it’s not. Everyone’s rights are still intact.

  4. Loudspeaker says:

    "Its a game, not a canvas."

    Aren’t you setting up the same prejudices that those who scream like JT do about games being only for kids?  If the content is user created then it is indeed a canvas.  I do agree that the publisher has the right to do as they will to their creation.  I will never argue against that point.  What I’m trying to point out is the irony in creating a game that has no bounds which should mimic humanity only to then put your own spin of morality in it.  Just my two cents.

    I agree with you that user created content will most likely be tame.  A penis forest will get a "Har har" but not last long in the scheme of things.

    I also want to thank you and the other posters for not going "flame mode" on my posts.  I just simply feel that we have devices that already reflect life and humanity that work (Internet anyone?).  It concerns me when I see companies going ape trying to make sure they don’t offend anyone when no matter how hard you try you will offend someone.

    "Volume helps to get a point across but sharp teeth are better."

  5. Keith K says:

    Its not built to reflect anything. Its a game, not a canvas. I realize it walks a fine line between the two, but that’s why its moderated and that’s why offensive material will be scrutinized by the moderators. The game doesnt exist to give anyone an artistic voice. It exists to let people have fun creating physics based gameplay. (And it does it really well) 

    No one is threatening Michaelangelo’s David here, but if you feel the need to plaster an "E" rated video game with phalluses, then I don’t think you should be allowed to contribute to the pool. And I say "Fuck you" if you feel your rights are violated. You really have no rights inside the intellectual property of a game developer. Its pretty standard MMO fare.

    All that said, I really feel it necessary to exclaim that during my time in the beta, I never saw anything at all offensive. I saw a few things that were perhaps a bit tasteless, but nothing that wouldn’t make it onto any saturday morning cartoon (if they still exist). I don’t think User Generated content is going to be quite the devil it’s been made out to be and I think LittleBigPlanet is the perfect medium to prove it. You can be pretty much as vulgar as you want but in that environment, it all just equals an ‘Itchy & Scratchy’ cartoon.

  6. kagirinai says:

    "items should be kept or removed on popular opinion"
    He didn’t say anything about censorship; I say popular opinion, which means it doesn’t matter if someone is offended, it matters if the majority is offended. This is imperfect, but essentially the best system for doing these sorts of judgements en mass without having an arbiter of some sort.

    What is ‘objectionable’ and what is ‘human’ are both objective. There’s no way to be totally certain of either on a large scale.

    For example: If the majority of a country endorses slavery, is slavery objectionable? Is the majority right because many agree? Then what about another scenario; if a minority particiaptes in a religion not shared by the majority, is the religion objectionable? Is this minority wrong because they are not the majority?

  7. Loudspeaker says:

    So since it’s on a world stage that makes it ok to scrutinize and shut down whatever is "objectionable".

    Then what’s the point of publishing anything if it will be taken down (aka censored) if it’s objectionable?  EVERYTHING is objectionable to SOMEONE.  Period.  Our good friend the soon-to-be-disbared lawyer is proof of that.

    Censorship is removing the "objectionable".  Short of death threats content should remain up in such an environment for one simple reason.  The object of the environment is to reflect humanity.  Humanity cannot exist with only the unobjectionable content.  If you create the environment in such then you’re no longer reflecting humanity for better or worse. 

    "Volume helps to get a point across but sharp teeth are better."

  8. kagirinai says:

    I believe the point he is making isn’t about censorship, but criticsm. To quote the sentiment of PZ Myers: "Nothing is sacred."

    In so much, if you opt to publish something questionable, it is now in public space and ‘open to scrutiny’, and the rest of the world is allowed to judge you and your work on its merits or lack thereof.

    What this isn’t doing is censorship, and it’s not dealing with what should be done with intolerant and hateful speech, though one could infer from the subtext that items should be kept or removed on popular opinion, which itself isn’t a bad idea though it would be abusable and would certainly lead to an odd form of censorship of unpopular ideas, right, wrong or otherwise.

  9. Loudspeaker says:

    So a game that’s built to reflect society should be censored?  Seriously?  Wow…

    Basically you’re saying that all of humanity can’t be trusted so someone needs to tell them what’s ok and not ok to say.  Which then removes part of the humanity, no matter how disgusting it might be to you.

    So the game should reflect humanity by removing it and showing only the "good" parts.

    I will refrain from Godwining this with the obvious.

    "Volume helps to get a point across but sharp teeth are better."

  10. fyreblaize says:

     actually, to them, everything is made by nintendo.  everyone i know who isnt a gamer refers to every game and console as "nintendo" or "nintendo game"

  11. Nocturne says:

    yup, and I think it’s safe to say that some of the annoyance at the games delay will get expressed in a less than tactful manner via the medium of sackboy

  12. CyberSkull says:

    He’s right you know, anyone with a big audience on TV or Radio doesn’t know what the sh*t user generated content. To them everything is by Sony, Microsoft or Nintendo on the console. We are just consumers.


  13. KayleL says:

    We all know it’s bond to happen. It’s the matter of time. Fox News, we are waiting, and prepare to throw rotten tomatoes at you and your misinformed guests. (Or raid them with one-star rating on the guest’s book on Amazon)

  14. kagirinai says:

    "Mr. Harrison, how do you respond to allegations that your games are causing innocent children to become violent eye-stabbing lunatics with a penchant for sex crimes?"

  15. Twin-Skies says:

    Er, Phil Harrison is now longer affiliated with Sony. He resigned last year.

    An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

  16. kagirinai says:

    "This morning on Fox News, we’re talking to Phil Harrison, owner of Sony Entertainment and creator behind the controversial muslim sex game, LittleBigPlanet, and we’re going for the FACTS."

  17. Nocturne says:

    Agreed, doesn’t matter that MM can remove it or that gamers and the vaguely tech savvy understand the difference between content made by the developer and user created content, all some people will ever understand of it is the headline "Game that allows you to recreate 9/11"

  18. Keith K says:

    You can still create anything you want, unfettered. There’s only a question of other people’s tastes when you decide to publish something.

    You can have all the anti-religious sentiment you like in your own levels. You wage all the 2D holy wars you like with your friends and no one will ever bother you. But as soon as you decide to publish it for mass consumption, it becomes subject to scrutiny.

  19. kagirinai says:

    1) If it’s hate speech, it should be removed. Bare in mind, ‘Hate speech’ is content meant to dilberately incite anger and offense, and isn’t the same as content that can be seen as offensive. If the level is hateful and removed, the created should be suspended from submitting content for a short while, and each subsequent offense should be met with a longer ban until they are permabanned for inciting hate.

    2) No, it shouldn’t matter. There is no content that should be ok for one person to say and not another, THAT is discrimination.

    3) It is odd — but ideally it’s not about what someone else deems acceptable, but rather, what doesn’t violate other people. People are free to think, talk, and create hateful, racist, sexist, homophobic, descriminatory things as they desire, but that doesn’t mean anyone else has to put up with their shit. This is why many countries have "Hate Speech" laws, to draw the line between free speech (expressing your opinion and ideas) and dialog designed entirely to anger and manipulate people in a discriminatory fashion. It’s sad that we need to legislate these things, and it’s sad that people can’t be more mature in anonymous online settings, but that’s life.

  20. NovaBlack says:


    Heres a conundrum…

    what happens if somebody created a level in LBP that literally, wasnt intended to be in any way offensive, that featured words from the quran written out in the scenery?



    Secondly i bet everyone imagined a white, non muslim creator…  would it then matter if the creator was non muslim? should it matter?.



    odd that a game that has the purpose of letting you create anything you can imagine, should suddenly only allow you to imagine what somebody else deems acceptable.



  21. Krono says:

    That the people watching Fox News cannot see a clear difference between the two issues is Penny Arcade’s point.


  22. Keith K says:

    I think P&A are off base on this one and in their typical fashion are well aware of it.

    The difference between a deluge of Cock Forests and a potentially offensive game track is that the game track is burned on disc. It cannot be removed.

    If anyone is offended by a ‘9/11 Simulator’, (Which by the way was a fairly thin thread to begin with, the level consisted of a plane type thing flying into a single exploding structure), they can report the level to the game mods and it can be dealt with appropriately, with due repercussion on the creator of said content.

    The User Generated content in LBP never leaves the iron grip confides of MediaMolecule’s online universe. They are in control at all times.

    Once the disc is in the hands of the user, it will never come back.

    If you cannot see a clear difference between the two issues, please return to watching Fox News.

  23. sqlrob says:

    I thought they controlled the Beta better than that. I fully expected something like that after release, but not on the beta.


  24. gamegod25 says:

    It’s sad but he’s right. People won’t know/care that it’s user content. And the media is sure to overlook that fact because all they care about is ratings.

    Remeber the Hot Coffeee fiasco? All that fuss over some poorly done sex minigame that you had to hack the game to find. If your kid is smart enough to do that, then he’s already looking at real porn on the internet.

  25. DorkmasterFlek says:

    What’s more, this delay is just pissing people off for seemingly no good reason, and is probably going to result in even more user created levels in the vain of what they are describing.  I understand Sony’s thinking after the Resistance church issue, but this was the wrong decision.

Comments are closed.