Ubisoft Doesn't Dare Release We Dare in the UK Either

March 9, 2011 -

Hey, did you UK readers see Ubisoft’s trailer for We Dare?  Did it perk your interest?  Would you like to play it?

Well too bad!  Ubisoft has decided not to release the game in the United Kingdom.

"Following the public reaction to the 12+ rating of We Dare, Ubisoft has made the decision not to sell the game in the United Kingdom."

We haven't seen reports of rioting in the streets.  As far as we’re aware, that "public reaction" doesn’t consist of much more than Keith Vaz and a few parents, going on nothing more than the trailer, opining that the game none of them had played was inappropriate for children as young as 12.  One parent, speaking to the Daily Mail, went so far as to say "this sort of computer game will only serve to fuel sexual tensions and, in a worse-case scenario, sexual touching or assault."

PEGI, the body that stamped the game with a 12 rating, continues to stand by its decision, telling IGN:

"Conclusions by press and commenters have been based exclusively on the online commercial, whereas the conclusions of PEGI were based on the game experience.  It was correct to give the game a 12 rating. The content of the game and the interaction that the game itself implies do not warrant a higher rating. Marketing may have implied something else, but PEGI does not rate advertising, it rates game content."


America and the UK are out but the game will be sold in other parts of Europe.  For now.

Via: The Telegraph

Thanks to beemoh for the heads up.

[Disclosure: I freelance for IGN.]

-Reporting from San Diego, GamePolitics Contributing Editor Andrew Eisen

Posted in

Comments

Re: Ubisoft Doesn't Dare Release We Dare in the UK Either

Recently it seems that it has been the publishers who have been blocking the content. Normally this controversy is what publishers crave (just look at EA's shameless tactics with Dante's Inferno) because it's free promotion and sales will increase. But Ubisoft, like EA with Medal of Honor, are self censoring.

I blame none of the newspapers or media for this, as this sort of mild outrage is to be expected and ignored (like it does with most games and films). They didn't run campaigns or petitions and there wasn't any increasing pressure to block it. Ubisoft a week or two after the controversy disappeared decided to block the release themselves.

Whether this is part of Ubisoft's tactics to increase demand, which will see them reverse the decision due to "major public demand" remains to be seen.

Re: Ubisoft Doesn't Dare Release We Dare in the UK Either

In practice, it doesn't really matter since I doubt it would have been popular anyway, just another piece of Wii shovelware. However, in principal, it was a terrible decision. The Daily Mail morons will think they have some sort of sway as to what gets published.

Re: Ubisoft Doesn't Dare Release We Dare in the UK Either

Amazing, PEGI has more stones than Ubisoft, and they lose no money if the game loses sales.

-Austin from Oregon

Feel free to check out my blog.

Re: Ubisoft Doesn't Dare Release We Dare in the UK Either

And here I thought it was only the US that was deathly afraid of sex. 

Re: Ubisoft Doesn't Dare Release We Dare in the UK Either

Absolute rubbish - they're only doing this to generate media interest in a party game (I would like to call it poor as indeed I haven't played it, yet it's hard to imagine it becoming the best of all time). There's NO WAY they're making a moral stand against censorship to the detriment of their sales, NO business acts that way!!

Re: Ubisoft Doesn't Dare Release We Dare in the UK Either

Sad, just sad. It seems we spend years fighting against censorship based on paranoia for the sake of the Industry, and as thanks they do it all by themselves.

I would stop buying Ubisoft games, but it's too late for that, besides, at this rate, will they let themselves release any more, or will they be too busy hiding under the blanket?

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

How do you usually divide up your Humble Bundle payments?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
MaskedPixelantehttp://i5.minus.com/iN5o9iu1ON2NG.jpg "It cursed my gear? WHY WOULD IT DO THAT?! THIS GAME IS BUGGED!"04/24/2014 - 9:51pm
Matthew Wilsonthe lose of nn would not be good for us, but it will not be good for verizion/comcast/att in the long run ether.04/24/2014 - 2:16pm
Matthew Wilsonsadly yes. it would take another sopa day to achieve it.04/24/2014 - 2:13pm
NeenekoI am also confused. Are you saying NN would only become law if Google/Netflix pushed the issue (against their own interests)?04/24/2014 - 2:10pm
E. Zachary KnightMatthew, you are saying a lot of things but I am still unclear on your point. Are you saying that the loss of Net Neutrality will be good in the long run?04/24/2014 - 2:06pm
Matthew WilsonOfcourse it does I never said it did not.though over time the death of NN will make backbone providers like Google, level3 and others stronger becouse most isps including the big ones can not provid internet without them. they can peer with smaller isps04/24/2014 - 1:54pm
E. Zachary KnightMatthew, and that still plays in Google's favor over their smaller rivals who don't have the muscle to stand up to ISPs.04/24/2014 - 1:45pm
Matthew Wilsongoogle wont pay becouse they control a large part of the backbone that all isps depend on. if verizon blocks their data, google does the same. the effect is Verizon loses access to 40% of the internet, and can not serve some areas at all.04/24/2014 - 1:14pm
Neenekolack of NN is in google and netflix interest. It is another tool for squeezing out smaller companies since they can afford to 'play'04/24/2014 - 12:57pm
Matthew WilsonI have said it before net nutrality will not be made in to law until Google or Netflix is blocked, or they do what they did for sopa and pull their sites down in protest.04/23/2014 - 8:02pm
Andrew EisenGee, I guess putting a former cable industry lobbyist as the Chairman of the FCC wasn't that great of an idea. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/24/technology/fcc-new-net-neutrality-rules.html?_r=204/23/2014 - 7:26pm
Andrew EisenIanC - I assume what he's getting at is the fact that once PS3/360 development ceases, there will be no more "For Everything But Wii U" games.04/23/2014 - 5:49pm
Andrew EisenMatthew - Yes, obviously developers will eventually move on from the PS3 and 360 but the phrase will continue to mean exactly what it means.04/23/2014 - 5:45pm
IanCAnd how does that equal his annoying phrase being meaningless?04/23/2014 - 5:09pm
Matthew Wilson@Andrew Eisen the phrase everything but wiiu will be meaningless afer this year becouse devs will drop 360/ps3 support.04/23/2014 - 4:43pm
Andrew EisenFor Everything But... 360? Huh, not many games can claim that title. Only three others that I know of.04/23/2014 - 3:45pm
MaskedPixelantehttp://www.joystiq.com/2014/04/23/another-world-rated-for-current-consoles-handhelds-in-germany/ Another World fulfills legal obligations of being on every gaming system under the sun.04/23/2014 - 12:34pm
Matthew Wilsonhttp://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/04/steam-gauge-do-strong-reviews-lead-to-stronger-sales-on-steam/?comments=1 Here is another data driven article using sales data from steam to figure out if reviews effect sales. It is stats heavy like the last one.04/23/2014 - 11:33am
Andrew EisenI love RPGs but I didn't much care for Tales of Symphonia. I didn't bother with its sequel.04/23/2014 - 11:21am
InfophileIt had great RPGs because MS wanted to use them to break into Japan. (Which had the side-effect of screwing NA PS3 owners out of Tales of Vesperia. No, I'm not bitter, why do you ask?)04/23/2014 - 10:52am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician