Smite Dev Removes "Offensive" Goddess From Website

[Al-Bundy-da-G]

Don't let the anti-freedom camp win:
FIGHT THIS BATTLE AGAINST RELIGIOUS ZEALOTS!

We can NOT allow religious groups, of any sort, to win battles when it comes to freedom of speech.
This leads us down a dark road of burning books, Shari Law, and female genital mutilation.


Also, Shiva was sexier in FF8 anyways:

You do realize tha Shiva is a hermaphradite right? All Hindu gods are.

Still hot though...

 

[catalyst8]

I believe Tanis was making a point using a broad set of examples not directed simply to Hinduism but to all of the primitive superstitions (hence 'religious groups, of any sort'), & a fair point it is. You do realize that, don't you?

Given that most of Tanis' posts on this particular subject appear to have been grossly overstating religious zealotry in general, I don't believe he was. Furthermore, I've seen the Islamic and Muslim faiths being confused for one another quite a few times. One can never be certain.

I was addressing the point made in the post, not the person who'd made it. Having seen Christian, Muslim, & Hindu zealotry first hand I can assure you it's difficult to overstate the disgusting effects of their foul dogmas (take as examples the two & a half year prison sentence given to a man in Jakarta two months ago because he's an athiest; the sporadic murder & rape sprees Christians & Muslims perpetrate against one another in numerous African states; the enforced poverty of Hindus if they're born into a certain caste; genital mutilation of children; the murder of rape victims on the grounds of adultery in Pakistan & Iran; the murder of homosexuals; the bombing of doctors' surgeries in the US, etc. etc.).

"I've seen the Islamic and Muslim faiths being confused for one another quite a few times."
They are the same, a Muslim is a follower of the Islamic sect of the Abrahamic religion.

 

[Flight]

I was addressing the point made in the post, not the person who'd made it. Having seen Christian, Muslim, & Hindu zealotry first hand I can assure you it's difficult to overstate the disgusting effects of their foul dogmas (take as examples the two & a half year prison sentence given to a man in Jakarta two months ago because he's an athiest; the sporadic murder & rape sprees Christians & Muslims perpetrate against one another in numerous African states; the enforced poverty of Hindus if they're born into a certain caste; genital mutilation of children; the murder of rape victims on the grounds of adultery in Pakistan & Iran; the murder of homosexuals; the bombing of doctors' surgeries in the US, etc. etc.).

"I've seen the Islamic and Muslim faiths being confused for one another quite a few times."
They are the same, a Muslim is a follower of the Islamic sect of the Abrahamic religion.

I think it's safe to say that zealotry in any form is horrible. However, this situation is not what that is. This is about a religious group being upset that their (still widely practiced) religion is apparently fair game. But if it's "fair game", then why aren't the other "main religions" fair game, too?

Whoops! That was supposed to be "Islamic and Hindu" faiths. I have no idea why I ended up typing it out that way. Sorry! I'll fix that. (Go, me.)

 

[Brutal Peanut]

I understand removing her from obvious oversexualized advertising, but removing her all-together from the game just seems silly and really taking their demands too far. Also, they should add Jesus or at least a character named Yeshua - even though he is more akin to a demi-god compared to other gods.

 

[Belated]

I first saw that image and thought "Oh, this is gonna be due to some feminazi complaint about the goddesses' boobs, right?" But wow. Hindus? This is the first video game thing I've ever read of Hindus complaining about. (That's not offensive. Feminists are only against the sheer frequency in which sexiness is used. Feminazis are against sexiness ever being in anything ever. If you're a true feminist, my comment doesn't refer to you.)

Most of the posts I'm seeing in here are along the lines of "That's stupid! You should've kept that image up!" And yet, somehow I bet if it WAS due to some puritan complaining because she hates everything sexy and thinks natural emotions of arousal are somehow wrong, at least half of you would be totally with her on that. Come on now, be honest. Most of you are only siding with the developer because it's religion that's complaining.

Still, screw them for complaining. It's fiction. It's somebody else's vision of art. It's not harming anybody. If you see something that offends you, just don't play it or watch it. It's pretty much impossible to depict anything without offending somebody anyway. You draw a picture of a happy family with a mother, father, son, and daughter, standing next to a house under the sun, you're going to offend people without both parents, anybody who's an only child, anybody who doesn't have a house, and anybody who lives somewhere that never gets any sun. You draw a picture of an orange, you're going to offend people who don't get to eat regularly. It's impossible [http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=079_1329366389] to not offend anybody. Just let the complainers complain and ignore them.

Live with this one simple mentality: Haters gonna hate.

 

[Mordorkin]

I don't think they did anything wrong per say in including the Hindu deities in their game. However it was on the short-sighted side of things to use gods from a major religion that has many active followers and not to realize that this would make some of them upset. If it was an intentional move intended to boost publicity, then I feel it is on the same level as some of the marketing stunts EA has pulled over the years. Maybe things could just have been though through a little better.

As a note on the side, I find it a little disappointing, if not necessarily surprising, that there is so much flame reserved for religion in general. Remember that as with all other groups of people that they are not a hive mind and that there are both good and bad religious people, and plenty that would just like to get on with their lives without bothering anyone. Just like everyone else in the world.

 

[Faladorian]

Fuckin' pussies. We have to stop listening to the whining of people who believe in fuckin' nonsense.

This. Ever bit as harsh as this and even harsher. Screw them, and by "them" I mean the development team and all of the religious paste-eaters who called for the ban.

Censorship is not okay, people. This is the 21st century. We've had way too much time to grow up to still be as stupid as we are.

 

[ElPatron]

...you know that this isn't going to destroy the freedom of speech right? Maybe you can all calm down a little?
Removing a single image =/= the destruction of freedom of speech.

If you don't use your rights, they will be taken away.

This sounds very extreme, but the they had no obligation to remove the image. Now there is a precedent that can be used to defend censorship.

Did you know that the song Sympathy For The Devil was removed from Black Ops in Germany because it had a reference to "Blitzkrieg"? Uncanny, right?

 

[Something Amyss]

If you don't use your rights, they will be taken away.

Except "free speech" isn't really an issue here.

This sounds very extreme, but the they had no obligation to remove the image. Now there is a precedent that can be used to defend censorship.

Except this isn't censorship. Voluntary removal of an image is not censorship. It's, in this case, "not being a douche."

I don't understand why so many people are against that.

Did you know that the song Sympathy For The Devil was removed from Black Ops in Germany because it had a reference to "Blitzkrieg"? Uncanny, right?

Uncanny? I don't think you're using the word right.

that, however, is an actual issue of censorship. The government actually has laws in place in Germany dealing with that whole..World War 2 thing.

The instance of a game dev taking down a picture when told the content is offensive is not censorship, nor does it lead to precedent. This is a slippery slope fallacy.

 

[Something Amyss]

I first saw that image and thought "Oh, this is gonna be due to some feminazi complaint about the goddesses' boobs, right?"

Wow, straw-feminism is so rampant it's now being made up in new and unrelated areas.

 

[Belated]

I first saw that image and thought "Oh, this is gonna be due to some feminazi complaint about the goddesses' boobs, right?"

Wow, straw-feminism is so rampant it's now being made up in new and unrelated areas.

I like how you completely and conveniently ignored the rest of my post which went into detail as to exactly what I meant. I'm obviously not talking about all feminists, just ones who go too far. And yes, feminists like that DO exist. For example, feminists who think bikinis in and of themselves are wrong, exist by the thousands. Feminists who are against any kind of sexiness DO exist by the thousands. It's not just a "straw" thing. They may not represent true feminists, or come close to being a majority. But they do exist. That's why I'm careful to differentiate between feminism and feminazism. I think the former of the two is a good thing. But the latter serves as a term that encompasses when it goes too far.

 

[Daggedawg]

Now just wait until these guys discover the Shin Megami Tensei series.

 

[Headdrivehardscrew]

I like religion.

But religious people really get on my nerves. That includes Scientologists, Communists, Anarchists and a whole bucketful of -ists.

 

[Headdrivehardscrew]

I first saw that image and thought "Oh, this is gonna be due to some feminazi complaint about the goddesses' boobs, right?"

Wow, straw-feminism is so rampant it's now being made up in new and unrelated areas.

While it's an objectionable mean redux you pulled there, just get this:

Feminism and similar concepts ending in -ism these days really only have one main purpose, which is to make everything political, that's why they pop up so virulently outside R&P and that's how they invade, permeate, soak your daily experience so much, even if you try really hard to just mind your own business. It's also pretty much always religious or political folks that will never accept any boundaries and feel obliged to invade your personal space whenever they damn well please.

I'm a fairly religious person myself and I think praying before going to bed does the kids some good, but I don't mind people hating on cultists, and I think we'd be better off without churches and mosques these days - burn'em all down for all I care, build mountains out of the rubble.

 

[Mauso88]

How dare Hi-Rez use your ficticious creations in their ficticious creations.

 

[jmarquiso]

Sure, they have a right to protest. Just as much as I have the right to tell them to piss off. I hope the developer does the same thing.

Are you asking them for money?

That has nothing to do with it. If you believe otherwise explain why that should come to bear on my right to protest their request if I believe it an attempt at suppression of speech?

Because it isn't an assault on freedom of speech. It's a business decision. An Asian and Indian audience is huge. That audience asked (not really politely, but they asked) to be removed from a game. Buddhist and Catholic organizations joined. It should be noted that Hinduism is the only living religion with a character in this game. It was an insensitive choice, the game was still in Beta, and content gets cut all the time at this stage. Especially when a potential market is involved.

An assault on freedom of speech would be a government imprisoning or executing a person or group for speaking out against them.

Freedom of Speech, as defined by the US Constitution and the US Supreme Court, isn't about saying whatever the fuck you want, it's about making points. The strongest content (according to the US Supreme Court is political speech, and the weakest is pornography. Entertainment is right above that, and video games JUST got included in that list. The US also has the MOST lenient view of free speech in the world.

Freedom of Speech includes the right to offend, and the right to be offended, as well as the right not to listen.. One should and could speak out if they are.

Now, the difference here is - "I want money from you, and by the way your god is one of many in dead religions fighting one another". The smart thing -when asking for money - is to change that perception.

 

[SteewpidZombie]

Sorry, my comment has more curse words than I originally intended XD, so I placed it below in spoilers. Just warning people who might be 'offended' by my language and opinion (cause ya'know, some people can't even read a random comment by a stranger they'll never meet without getting up in arms).

Spoiler

Awh dammit! This is South Park all over again! If they give into one group's demands, the rest will never quit bitching! (Look up the controversy behind the 'Scientology' episodes of South Park that got banned from TV).

They should've just expressed their freedom of speech and politely told the people who are bitching: "Eat shit, and maybe we'll consider removing the image of that whore".

 

[keinechance]

It's very peculiar to see grown people getting upset about their imaginary friends.

 

[ElPatron]

If you don't use your rights, they will be taken away.

Except "free speech" isn't really an issue here.

Uh... Yes it is. The same right that protects the existence of those "offensive" cartoons that made people flip their shit, the Passion of Christ or even Valley of the Wolves: Palestine.

The same right that protects the creation of Rucka Rucka Ali music.

Except this isn't censorship. Voluntary removal of an image is not censorship. It's, in this case, "not being a douche."

It was voluntary, but now there is a reason to rain flak over other developers. I don't think that a developer having to give in to pressure because they are desperate to release the game so that they can have money can be called "voluntary".

And how does that image make anyone a douche?

Accidentally cultural insensitiveness? Debatable.

Uncanny? I don't think you're using the word right.

Familiar but weird. Resembles something I know but makes me feel uncomfortable.

I think I am using it right.

that, however, is an actual issue of censorship. The government actually has laws in place in Germany dealing with that whole..World War 2 thing.

I know. But it's a single word. In a song that can be played on German radio stations.

I understand the censorship of Swastikas in videogames because their appearance on "toys" is deemed unconstitutional in Germany.

But a song? They went Full Metal Retard.

The instance of a game dev taking down a picture when told the content is offensive is not censorship, nor does it lead to precedent. This is a slippery slope fallacy.

Huh, no. A "slippery slope" implies snowballing, a continuum fallacy.

"If we allow gay marriage, nothing will stop people people from marrying dogs and horses!" - slippery slope

"If we allow gay marriage, gay people will marry" - not a slippery slope

Captcha: points dont matter

 

[Jabberwock xeno]

Oh, is this that fighting game I heard about years ago that was in development?

The one where you had jesus, god, satan, the budda, and a bunch of other dieties beating the crap out of each other?