-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
I found a vagina in Watch Dogs 2 and Sony suspended me (Update: Ban lifted)
- Thread starter Goron2000
- Start date
You seem to be ignoring the full-frontal part, and you are insulting my comprehension?
There is no way of knowing what the ESRB saw, since they only gave two examples. Unless I'm mistaken and you work for them.
Arkos
Nose how to spell and rede to
Briefs normally at least encompass every part of the genitals tho
Pancake Mix
Copied someone else's pancake recipe
Full-frontal is not the issue, that was known, the issue is the word brief. I'm not trying to be insulting, but this isn't brief and I think the description would be different if there was awareness that you could view this for an extended period of time.
Movalpolos
Banned
This thread has delivered.
Funny, however if the screenshot in question is what we are talking about, some odd individual could stare at that poor woman for days and I'm pretty sure that amount of time doesn't constitute as breif.
Since you can stare at the two examples given as long as you want, how is that any different?
Why would this make a difference given that it's situational?
RiccochetJ
Gold Member
Well, I mean if you decide to just solely stick around that particular area it isn't brief. I'm going to take a guess that the game isn't overwhelmingly populated with people walking around in the buff.
Glowing Bovine
Member
I suppose the question is if the body will stay there indefinitely as long as the player is present?
Pancake Mix
Copied someone else's pancake recipe
Again, brief. The description reads like the ESRB didn't know that this could potentially not be brief.
It may mean nothing to the rating, but this is not brief.
True, but I have the feeling that just cutscenes were shown. Perhaps this situation was not shown, with the camera staring indefinitely at it. I think the description would have changed, that's all.
There are probably people who have dealt with the ESRB before on GAF who would have a better understanding.
As it's an open world video game, technically nothing is brief. Not saying you're wrong so much as they're using film/TV rating systems and applying them to an interactive medium where, 99% of a person's experience in Watch Dogs 2 could be staring at a vagina if they chose to. For most people, this would be a fleeting thing and fall into "brief".
You skipped over the first part of my post.
Couldn't you potentially stare at the body-painted woman or the man and woman (given in the two examples) as long as you want?
Lol you're debating what the word brief means. I guess now is the question of what the word brief is and it's true meaning.
Pancake Mix
Copied someone else's pancake recipe
Not if it's in a cutscene or any situation where the word brief would apply. Would be bizarre to use something that implies a specific amount of time.
Theoretically if it's only in a cutscene it could be. In fact, one position from Hot Coffee was sort of kept in San Andreas after Hot Coffee's files were removed. It was just used very briefly upon entering an area. It was known when the game originally received an MA15+ in Australia and an M in North America.
Head.spawn
Junior Member
lololol
those eyes. looks sooo familiar!
CamHostage
Member
Well, it is brief if you move on and don't stare at it agog for as long as your eyeballs can stand it...
I do agree, the ESRB breakdown for Watch Dogs 2 doesn't do the presence of nudity justice, and it implies that the nudity is covered by bodypaint or as infrequent as a singular man and woman standing next to each other, so it should be amended. However, the full profile is a website-only feature, and rarely used or enforced. Mostly the ESRB holds product manufacturers and sales outlets and news sources to the rating and the descriptors, which say simply, "Blood, Intense Violence, Nudity, Sexual Themes, Strong Language, Use of Drugs". If you buy a game with nudity, expect to find nudity,
(By the way, I do believe Content Descriptors are part of the submission process from a publisher, and then the publisher and ESRB work together to verify and approve the content. So Ubisoft will not be surprised that its full-frontal nudity is waived away as "brief", and the ESRB is most likely aware of just how accessible the nudity is in the game but I would doubt it's totally their wording of the scenarios that nudity is supposed to appear. This is also I assume an unintended display of that nudity texture, assuming that's what this is, so it's a different issue from what would have been presented in Ubisoft's content breakdown submission, and even code errors can be considered rating challenges, as evidenced by Hot Coffee and some lesser-known re-ratings.)
That said, there is a descriptor for "Partial Nudity" that you see in a games with suggestive content (bikinis and bare backs and plunging cleavage or whatever else anime titles are using to show as much boobie as they can get away with,) but just "Nudity" is under-descriptive and covers a range of issues. I'm curious why they never added additional catalog descriptors for nudity since a game with a few boobies (PG-13 by movie standards) and a game with full-frontal nudity (R and potentially NC-17 by the MPAA) both get the same "Nudity" mark. If they're listing "Intense Violence" and "Strong Sexual Content" and "Blood and Gore" and things like that, "Full Frontal Nudity" would be appropriate to denote on the bulletpoint chart of Content Descriptors so that parents can indulge their children's fascination with bazongas but keep their defenseless eyeballs clean of ding-dongs and vajayjays. Or just so that Ubisoft doesn't get in trouble next time when it doesn't describe the word "nudity" enough.
MorshuTheTrader
Neo Member
Now here's the real question: If I own a 1080p tv, will the genitals look better with the ps4 pro?
Asking for a friend
Asking for a friend
Cock of War
Member
Why do characters have eyes? A head, fingers etc.? Apart from the unjust suspension, this is a non-issue.
People are still arguing over ESRB descriptions?
Technically the ESRB person could have stood, staring at the nude woman for 24 hours, he/she didn't and classed the nudity as brief. The description is fine, if ESRB didn't find a problem I don't think we should be arguing against it. Ubisoft would have had to have told them about it either way.
(No, 1 person did not hide a pixel vagina from 100's of staff and higher ups who sign off on work).
Technically the ESRB person could have stood, staring at the nude woman for 24 hours, he/she didn't and classed the nudity as brief. The description is fine, if ESRB didn't find a problem I don't think we should be arguing against it. Ubisoft would have had to have told them about it either way.
(No, 1 person did not hide a pixel vagina from 100's of staff and higher ups who sign off on work).
Keyser Soze
Member
In regards to the possibility of lingering on nudity...
ESRB cannot rate people, but they chose to rate full frontal nudity as "M." Players themselves can always choose to do things that can look distasteful with any content in a game. That does not make the content in any way worse.
ESRB cannot rate people, but they chose to rate full frontal nudity as "M." Players themselves can always choose to do things that can look distasteful with any content in a game. That does not make the content in any way worse.
Read my last sentence. Playing how your average person would, this would be a brief thing. You'd have to commit to staring at the vagina/penis to elevate beyond brief - at least from this example. And most of that would come, like OP, from the rarity of seeing genitalia in video games. I don't understand how an extra few seconds should determine a rating. Is there any documentation on how the ESRB tackles open world games? Watch Dogs/GTA/Mafia/Saints Row could all be turned into Hated level killing simulators if someone opts to play that way, just like Watch Dogs 2 could become a pervert's playpen. There are games that could be turned into rampant drug simulators as well. Basically, I think there needs to be an overhaul in the descriptors that would allow for discrepancies between gameplay and cutscences, especially in large open world games with.
Either way, this is getting really off the topic that should be about Sony's weird decisions on what is taboo and what is not.
I completely and utterly disagree with this. There are people that are going to play this game weather it's kids or necrophiliacs that are now all of the sudden going to make it their own personal achievement to kill a woman just to see their vagina. This is different, and regardless to what some people think of this, it's important to point out that to many people this is weird as fuck, and to me its weird as fuck that it got through q & a.
The_Spaniard
Netmarble
This is one of those cases of something that wasn't an issue until it became an issue.
Op should have known better, but so should have Sony. Op shouldn't have been temp banned, maybe warned, considering that this is new ground, and Sony should have just deleted the post while warning him and taken this as a lesson and a learning opportunity.
Going forward Sony can put specific rules against sharing things like this and THEN punish people for breaking them. I'd also suggest creating new share settings, let people select settings that cater to their desires. Do you have kids and don't want them to see bad things? Set share settings to restricted, so they don't see M rated stuff on their wall. Are you a mature adult that wants to see mature adult things, set your share settings to match that. Something like that should be a fair and reasonable compromise for everyone.
When you have your share settings set to see and share M rated things, anything in a game should be fair game to share, and only people that have their share settings to see M rated things would see your posts.
Now if you'll excuse me I'm going to share a montage of MKX fatalities to circus music, or possibly one of Sniper Elite nut shots set to Blue Danube on my PS4, while tutting at the OP judgmentally. Because we all know that Sony will have no problem with that.
Op should have known better, but so should have Sony. Op shouldn't have been temp banned, maybe warned, considering that this is new ground, and Sony should have just deleted the post while warning him and taken this as a lesson and a learning opportunity.
Going forward Sony can put specific rules against sharing things like this and THEN punish people for breaking them. I'd also suggest creating new share settings, let people select settings that cater to their desires. Do you have kids and don't want them to see bad things? Set share settings to restricted, so they don't see M rated stuff on their wall. Are you a mature adult that wants to see mature adult things, set your share settings to match that. Something like that should be a fair and reasonable compromise for everyone.
When you have your share settings set to see and share M rated things, anything in a game should be fair game to share, and only people that have their share settings to see M rated things would see your posts.
Now if you'll excuse me I'm going to share a montage of MKX fatalities to circus music, or possibly one of Sniper Elite nut shots set to Blue Danube on my PS4, while tutting at the OP judgmentally. Because we all know that Sony will have no problem with that.
ScientificPizza
Banned
vaginagate just sounds like some brand of contraception
dreamer3kx
Member
wtf, late to party...wtf.
The game has an age rating for a reason... You can't really take issue with the game or developers/QA because some parents don't give a shit about what content their kids consume.
The game isn't meant to be for kids to play, it's meant to be for teenagers and adults.
The OP saw something weird in a game that is playable on the PS4 and shared it. Sony should have been thanking the OP for pointing this out.
I would have never thought sharing something playable on the PS4 would be suspendable.
When I say kids, I'm meaning people old enough to think it would be cool to kill a chick to see her vagina. I'm pretty sure teenager fits that description.
And for the sake of argument, let's keep the age rating out of this because you can't blame a kid for playing shit that the parent bought for them.
This debate that I'm having has nothing to do with the integrity of the cashier when the game is purchased.
Cock of War
Member
The game has an appropriate age rating. Don't demonize the vagina.
Was there much of an uproar about satan's penis in Dante's Inferno?
You don't have to kill anyone to see them. You can see both male and female full frontal nudity while they're alive.
I guess you could kill a bunch of men and women to see their balls and crotch up their skirts/shorts.
Edit* Also, it's 100% on the parent if they provide their child with something they don't approve of. I screen anything my daughters watch or play. No excuses.
Cock of War
Member
So the old "GTA and Doom are murder simulators conditioning our youth to be psychopaths" argument?
Nope, it has more to to do with a dead woman with her legs spread and a full frontal vagina staring you in the face.
Sephiroth_VII
Member
Does... Does this mean we can finally have uncensored nudity in console games? That's amazing!
I'm not being funny, I genuinely think this is a huge step forward in Sony(and presumably Microsoft's) thinking. Now all that's left is to allow actually adult games on consoles, and all the stupid censorship bullshit will finally be gone.
I'm not being funny, I genuinely think this is a huge step forward in Sony(and presumably Microsoft's) thinking. Now all that's left is to allow actually adult games on consoles, and all the stupid censorship bullshit will finally be gone.
WaterAstro
Member
What's the ESRB rating?
If they didn't disclose it when they were getting ESRB approval, they are in big trouble.
If they didn't disclose it when they were getting ESRB approval, they are in big trouble.
Sephiroth_VII
Member
M. It's a fitting rating.
Massive Duck. C.M.
Banned
WatchCats
Eh, what's wrong with the human anatomy? Spilling guts = okay, but them dam peneer and vageeners are dangerous filth
Sephiroth_VII
Member
Didn't you know? Kids go blind if they look at the stuff!
That's why all Danish kids actually go blind once they start watching TV!!
Really? Did you read that whole thing? Not once do you see in the esrb that you can stare at crotchless pantied dead hooker.
I'm not trying to play Devils advocate here but let's be real. It's there and can be visualized for as long as you're looking at it, so it's not brief. And it's weird.
ArtHands
Thinks buying more servers can fix a bad patch
maybe thats not textured by Ubi. They might have purchased the 3d human model online (and yes it come textured with vagina) , model clothes on it, rig and then animate it.
As to why will that come texture with vagina, well that same 3d model can also be purchased by medical, science, art institutions etc for human anatomy studies and other uses.
And yes its a common practice in the game industry. Nearly every AAA studios does that.
Sephiroth_VII
Member
It says nudity. It's right there, no need to spell it out any further. If you're afraid your kid might go to hell for looking at a weener, that should tell you everything you need to know.