Sony Refuses to Pull Offensive Game, Hindu Groups Say

Hindu groups protesting the recent release of Hanuman: Boy Warrior for the PlayStation 2 have apparently run out of patience with Sony.

As GamePolitics reported last week, U.S.-based Hindu leader Rajan Zed said that Sony was looking into claims that the game, released only in India, is offensive to Hindus.

However a press release issued by Zed earlier this week seems to indicate that Sony will not intervene in Hanuman’s distribution. Bhavna Shinde of Forum for Hindu Awakening (also based in the United States) is quoted in the release:

So now we are left with no other alternative except to intensify our protests. Lord Hanuman is a highly revered Deity for us Hindus and we cannot accept any more denigration of Him…

 

We are shocked at the stubbornness of Sony Corporation not to withdraw the PlayStation2 game ‘Hanuman: Boy Warrior’ despite our repeated requests. Sony Corporation is held in high esteem the world over with high ethical principles. We were expecting that Sony would not hurt the feelings of the one billion strong Hindu population for a minor product like this game.

Although Hanuman is the first console game developed completely in India, it has received very poor reviews from Indian gaming sites.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone

38 comments

  1. 0
    jedidethfreak says:

    Does anyone know what about this game, exactly, is supposed to be offensive?  I’m not seeing it.  A revered god of the Hindu faith is featured in a game.  Is this all?

     

    Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone’s feelings.

  2. 0
    hayabusa75 says:

    Maybe they’d be taken more seriously if Hindus weren’t funny little people who deserve to be mocked.

    Er, according to Hollywood, anyway.

    "De minimus non curat lex"

  3. 0
    Wormdundee says:

     Hahahaha, these damn people just don’t get it. You do not have the right to not be offended, unless the cause of the offense somehow infringed on your other constitional rights.

    "…no other alternative except to intensify our protests…" This is distilled hilarity right here. He makes it sound like they’re going to do something crazy that will force Sony’s hand and then it ends up being, "we’re, um…going to yell some more…and we’ll probably do it louder! Yeah. How you like them apples?"

    "We were expecting that Sony would not hurt the feelings of the one billion strong Hindu population"

    Awwwww, want a tissue? Don’t worry, I’ll tell the big meanies that they can’t hurt your feelings anymore.

    Fuck these people, and anyone who thinks their feelings are sacred. Can’t take a verbal bitchslap? Don’t whine about it, grow some balls.

  4. 0
    Ryno says:

    I’m still looking for some clarification here: does Sony have ANYTHING to do with publishing the game, or did they just license it for the PS?

    And, yes, MartyB, you are correct.

     

    Saying that Jack Thompson is impotent is an insult to impotent men everywhere. They’ve got a whole assortment of drugs that can cure their condition; Jack, however…

  5. 0
    gamadaya says:

    I love watching idiots gradually come to the realization that the world does not revolve around them and their bullshit rules. Do not back down Sony. You dissapointed me with the LBP thing, so I hope you do better this time.

    ——————————————————–

    Believe in something! Even if it’s wrong, believe in it! -Glenn Beck

  6. 0
    jedidethfreak says:

    The same Sony that paid to make Micheal Jackson’s last album?  You call that ethical buisness practice?  I don’t care if he was acquitted, that’s just bad mojo.

     

    Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone’s feelings.

  7. 0
    Duffy says:

    That case appears to fill the criteria.

    I should probably have clarified myself on the concept of censorship; if a company wishes to edit part of a game before or even after release they are allowed to do so for whatever their reasons may be, they can even drop it.

    The case you cited appears to be interesting, instead of changing a minor issue, they decided it was sound to just drop the game, which they would probably have done anyways due to it’s lack of sales. A better question is could we find a US example where something similar happened with a selling title.

    The question we are really discussing is if they should be forced to censor their work or part of it due to outside forces attempting to enact their will upon the creator. Such a case I am not aware of.

  8. 0
    E. Zachary Knight says:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kakuto_Chojin

    Sounds to me like a similar situation to LBP, except this game sucked and Microsoft decided that editing and rereleasing the game would be unprofitable. Had the game been good, they may have released an edited version.

    It was pulled off the shelves in early 2003 for offensive religious content, namely that it had verses from the Quran being chanted as part of the background sound effects the song "Love/Hate Chant", which serves as theme song for the character Asad (a Muslim himself), is an example of this controversy. To date there has not been any evidence that Kakuto Chojin was re-released. The initial intent may have been to reissue the game without the chant but it did not sell well before being pulled and Microsoft presumably decided based on that fact to withdraw it permanently as a reissue would not have been profitable. In fact, Kakuto Chojin is not found on any official game list published by Microsoft further suggesting that there was no reissue and Microsoft has decided to erase the game from its records.

    I think you are running out of games to list. Come back when you have one that was actually pulled and never again released solely because of an outcry.

    E. Zachary Knight
    Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
    http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma


    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  9. 0
    sqlrob says:

    Kakuto Chojin, "offensive" religious content. Sounds the same as the LBP issue, just pulled instead of delayed.

    Self censorship is ENTIRELY germane. That’s exactly what this group wants Sony to do.

     

  10. 0
    Duffy says:

    I applaud your effort, but it appears your jumping at anything you can find.

    Thrill Kill was cancelled by the publisher before it’s release, I can’t find a record of any protests against it that could be related. Hell, it even has "appropriate" ESRB ratings considering.

    As per your examples being germane, I do not really agree. Games have been canceled or toned down by self-censorship. Thats fine, but we have yet to find a case where a game was released in the US and then banned due to a protest by some group that was "offended". That is the topic at hand, please stick to it.

  11. 0
    E. Zachary Knight says:

    Umm…. Thrill Kill was canned because the company developing it was bought by EA and EA decided it didn’t fit their business image to publish it. Not because of some kind of outrage from watchdog groups.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrill_Kill

    E. Zachary Knight
    Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
    http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma


    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  12. 0
    sqlrob says:

    Game removal? How about Thrill Kill?

    TTBOMK, there haven’t been legal attempts on this game either, so my examples are completely germane.

     

  13. 0
    Duffy says:

    Sooo did they actually change anything? And even so, changing a line of dialogue to shut some people up is pretty different from banning a game out right due to all of it’s content.

    If they did change it, it was probably cheaper to appease them in the case you cited with negligible affect on your reputation and the game’s integrity then it is to take them to court where they would eventually lose.

    Find an example where a protest for whatever reason has resulted in a ban in the U.S. and I’ll agree with you.

  14. 0
    Saxy says:

    Well, it depends on if an appearance on South Park is considered abuse or advertisement.

    What I have to say is this: Some religious people, get upset over stupid things. I, personally, don’t care if Jesus is on South Park or if Hinuman (I probably spelled that wrong, apologies in advance) gets a game. Does it affect my faith? Not at all.

  15. 0
    MartyB says:

     If a group ever tried to make a hunger strike against something I would do, i would send them a round of pizza or something, you know, the whole salt in the wound thing.

  16. 0
    Stealthguy says:

    I was so going to say that! Zed better get in on it too, if only to show the world the strength of his conviction that his game is wrong.

    Like I said before, CRY MORE!

  17. 0
    Stealthguy says:

    I was so going to say that! Zed better get in on it too, if only to show the world the strength of his conviction that his game is wrong.

    Like I said before, CRY MORE!

  18. 0
    Ashkihyena says:

    Is this the same Sony thats trying to push more PS3’s with Ghostbusters that we’re talking about?  That Sony?  Pft, I must’ve missed that memo about them being ethical.

  19. 0
    Parallax Abstraction says:

    You have an example of something else?  Compared to most US companies to whom ethics are largely considered bad business, Sony has a very good track record of ethical behaviour.

    Parallax Abstraction
    Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
    blog.digital-lifeline.ca

  20. 0
    Shadow D. Darkman says:

    I sent an e-mail to the Hindu forum addressed for those objecting to the game. I hope they won’t be mad, even though I didn’t say anything that should offend them.

    —————————–

    "The sun will always rise tomorrow. We can only live for today, and hope more days will come." -Unknown

  21. 0
    Neeneko says:

    I can only imagine the power rush that speaking for full billion people.  Too bad the authority is probably all in this guy’s head.

  22. 0
    TBoneTony says:

    Fine, you know what?

    Stuff those religious people who have not played the game.

    People think that we gamers are the loosers and have no lives, but the reality is that people who bitch and moan about what happens on the news and feel all negative, THEY are the ones who are loosers and need to get a life.

     

  23. 0
    MartyB says:

     Maybe a hunger strike will be more affective lol

    Like there’s no better way to get a compagny to do something they don’t want to, then by making yourself stop eating,  even though your the one suffering, They’re guilt will become so great that they’ll HAVE to remove the game /sarcasm

  24. 0
    MechaTama31 says:

    Good.  I’m glad Sony is ignoring these dimwits.  If they don’t want to "denigrate Hanuman", they can simply choose not play the game.  They are not everybody else’s keeper.

  25. 0
    MartyB says:

     Isn’t this the game that was made in India, and only available in India.  And yet it’s the american and Australian making a fuss…  If that’s still the case this is just funny.

Leave a Reply