http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7679151.stm

So everyone's afraid they might offend muslims (who are, as a whole, reasonable enough people that they would likely have taken it in stride anyway), but those silly Bible-bashers get ignored?

Maybe terrorism is working. >.>

On a more serious note, why on earth should speaking phrases from the Kur'an be offensive? It's a scripture which has had major roles in shaping the world as we live in it today, it should be expected to end up in popular culture, much like all the other judeo-christian scriptures do. Some people need to take their religion a touch less seriously, methinks.

My understanding is that mixing speech from the Koran and music is considered offensive; it's not just the inclusion of them in the game.

While I don't think that any publisher should feel obligated to not do legal things that may offend someone, if they CHOOSE to change things to the least-offensive path, well, that's no better or no worse than choosing to do something that may be offensive.

Additionally, I know there are specific limitations on reproducing, translating, altering or selling the Koran. These are all specific limitations within the Koran itself. This is why you probably won't see a 'Dummies Guide to the Koran' any time soon.

Backward Compatible's take on it

Sorry I didn't provide any commentary myself - it's just that this kind of thing irritates me so much that I was afraid I might say something rash.



Yes, but let's not pretend to believe that Sony is just trying to be polite. And while removing a few phrases from a videogame soundtrack isn't a big deal, naturally it's the principle of the matter that is concerning. What happens if an artist or author wants to draw upon the Koran for source material? Oh wait, we already know what happens.

I'm with BlueRondo on this one - the whole thing just makes me crazy.

There are so many people screwing up here, I don't know who to hate more.

The extremists that slaughter enough random people to have everyone looking over their shoulder.
The people who supposedly are not extremists but nonetheless tacitly support their actions.
The whole world for not collectively rejecting the cultural blackmail.
Individual companies, governments or news organs that do not have the guts to lead the way to that collective rejection.

A spoiled child on the global stage has thrown enough temper tantrums that they are dictating policy to the world, and everyone else is just letting them have their way, perpetuating the problem.

Or maybe the game designers wanted to remove something that could cause controversy so the public would be focused on how awesome their game is rather than wether or not it's an underhanded attack on a religion? I don't know... maybe they just wanted to get paid for their years of work rather than make a huge goddamn political statement.

Yes I think this is getting blown out of proportion here.

Well, yeah. They're still valid points though, and there's always the paranoid assumptions that this will just be the first step towards even worse things (assumptions that aren't completely unfounded, mind).

In a world that is becoming increasingly cencored, it's worth bringing up discussion about the nagative impacts of cencorship at any available opportunity.

This is true but this isn't a story about riots that broke out over a political cartoon that was designed to say pointed things about Islam. This is about a single level in a primarily user created game that featured some verses for the quran which the designers, I believe wisely, decided to remove to preempt any sort of retarded controversy that would spring up following the games release.

If this had been a game commenting on Islamic culture that had been self sensored by Sony because they didn't want to catch the flak I'd be shouting "Bullshit!" from the highest bastion of the intertubes. As it is LittleBigWorld is a game about user created content in an evolving 2nd platformer. It's supposed to be fun, not politics. If Sony had decided to pull user created content because it was deemed offensive I'd be a little put out but again, it's their right as a producer to decide what kind of image they want their product to project. Would there be an uproar if some racist lyrics had slipped in during production? Not everyone finds dropping the N-bomb to be wrong but that hardly make it appropriate for something designed for mass consumption.

Designers have a right to their own products. They may lose some of those rights if they're designing tools for users to create more product with but I think they have a right to control the initial distribution. I think this issue is a more complex than "The terrorists win!"

People have valid points but I think that this isn't the right bloody shirt to be waving. There's a difference between quashing free expression and saying "Hm... that's not really the point of our product so lets pull that out."

Its very obviously BS, not because it is wrong for publishers to want to be inoffensive but because that's obviously just a smokescreen excuse for the recall.

A worldwide recall of a product like this isn't cheap and Muslims are a minority in most of the major game-buying regions. It would be far more cost effective to have a targeted recall in the Middle East and go ahead everywhere else. The potential financial loses from offending a few hardcore Muslims really aren't sufficiently significant to warrant the cost such a global recall.

This leads me to believe that the actual problems were far greater than a few verses, probably a buffer overflow somewhere in there that would allow a creative hacker to run unsigned code (or even install unsigned firmware). To the hardcore gaming community, which includes a good many home brewers and moders, being afraid of suicide bombers is a far more acceptable reason for recall than fixing a buffer overflow is.

If that was true, instead of just rabid speculation, than I'd have to agree that an outrage would again be in order.

Of course I still can't fault the publisher. If they're recalling product to fix a problem that would turn into another "Oh God Sony Is Installing Vile Rootkits!" than they're probably making the right choice.

I still maintain that they're trying to avoid the controversy and get a little free advertising in the process. The shear amount of hoopla that came out of similiar incidents (the Nike shoe thing years ago, and so food things a couple of years ago) is probably reason to preempt it and move on.

Penny arcade's ever humourous take on things.

And the accompanying editorial.

The way I see it, this is the result of a successful shadowrun on behalf of Microsoft, who hired a crew to insert the offensive song/Koran combo right at the very last moment before the game shipped, thus causing the recall when the tampering became evident.

Well done, Microsoft.

Actually, a Buffer Overflow is just the opposite of Sony Is Installing Vile Rootkits. A buffer overflow really doesn't do anything to your machine, good or bad, but you can voluntarily exploit it to run unlicensed or pirated software. Doing so requires a bit of effort, but it is one of the prefered ways to deal with several major system's licensing enforcement measures (X-Box, Playstation 2, Wii, and PSP all have buffer overflow exploits available for them, X-Box 360 doesn't because Microsoft was absurdly lax with their security, allowing a simply drive firmware flash to bypass everything and the DS is totally open to anyone with a compatible flash card). It can't hurt you at all, it only gives you a chance to take control of your machine.

The PS3 currently doesn't have any exploitable errors on record and Sony has a real financial interest in keeping it that way, given that it could make the platform more popular to developers and thus to gamers (Currently, the PS3 is supported entirely by the massive strength of Metal Gear Solid 4 and it needs more popular exclusives if it wants to remain competitive.)

I was looking at it terms that I think the public understand an issue. So let me rephrase:
"Sony has done something to fuck up my PS3!"

I think that having an exploitable security hole would constitute just such a PR nightmare.

>Edited for content this day of our lord 23 October two thousand and eight.

Well, we're dealing with the Playstation 3, not a computer. There is no way such a thing could possible mess up a computer. And no one would know about it outside of the modding community, which would understand it. A buffer overflow isn't exactly big news. It is, in fact, not news at all, except to homebrew and softmodding enthusiasts.

Ah no, I understand now. You're upset because you think Sony is patching something to ensure it'll maintain the propeitary nature of it's console. Got it. Totally misunderstood you.

I'm not upset. It's part of the great game, to be enjoyed. There are far more interesting techniques to use than a brutish buffer overflow, such as those which require microsurgical forceps to hold very tiny wires to very tiny pins so that you can dump ROM and RAM.

I'm just saying that this is a far more likely explanation, given how damned on the ball Sony has been about this stuff recently, than the explanation that they were afraid to offend Muslims.

We should have asked for the removal of the so-called-Shadowrun FPS. That was deeply offensive.

My frustration is not directed at Sony or their decision to avoid controversy; I'm not angry that Sony didn't defiantly stand up against the complainers and say, "Oh ho! Take that!" (although it would have pleased me if they had, but that's not the point.) My attitude is that using verses from the Koran should not be cause for controversy in the first place. Not a controversy large enough to inspire a recall, at least, especially in markets where it is perfectly, widely, culturally acceptable to quote from religious texts (in contrast with your example, where it is not widely culturally acceptable to use the "N-bomb" in mass media, though it is within one's legal right to do so.)

To clarify, therefore, the "bullshit" of the topic title is not a reference to Sony's decision to avoid controversy; the "bullshit" is meant to refer to the fact that people are even offended by this sort of thing. Now, we could get into a very long and drawn out discussion about which sorts of things "ought" to be cause for controversy and which sorts of things ought not to be - or whether anyone even has a right to make such judgments. Without getting into such a discussion though, I don't think it is entirely unreasonable of me to make the judgment that quoting from a religious text - especially in a non-malicious manner - is not the sort of thing that should cause a controversy.