digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

Cathedral row over 'Resistance: Fall of Man'

news.bbc.co.uk — The Church of England is seeking legal action against entertainment company Sony for featuring Manchester Cathedral in a war battle computer game. Sony Playstations 'Resistance: Fall of Man uses the interior of the cathedral's nave without permission. The game, which has sold more than one million copies, shows a virtual shoot-out in the cathedral

show profanity settings
expand all
  • vx69, on 10/11/2007, -10/+152Some people really need to understand the concept of reality and fantasy.
    • danep, on 10/11/2007, -9/+76Seriously... I think my thoughts on the matter can be pretty well summed up by the quote by the Sony representative... "[Umm... are you guys for real?] It's entertainment, just like Dr. Who or any other science fiction. It isn't based on reality at all." If you can't separate entertainment from reality (a problem a large part of our culture seems to suffer from) you've got some serious issues my friend. Doubly so if you've risen into a position of power (like bishop) without being able to differentiate the two.
    • Azimuth1, on 10/11/2007, -69/+17As much of a gamer as I am, I think I have to side with them on this one. This isn't a Jack Thompson style "violent video games make people commit crime" issue. They used the interior of the cathedral without permission from its owners. It's not so much the violent content of the game that they're angry about (though they obviously are angry about that), it's the fact they just came in and took pictures of their building and used it in a game without even asking if it was okay. It would be the same if a movie crew came in one day and started filming without any permission. I think they have a right to be annoyed about this.

      What they should have done is made up a fake cathedral and set that part of the game in there.
    • Twoodge, on 10/11/2007, -5/+47CoE, you need to get a ***** grip.

      Why don't NYC officials sue Rockstar for GTA IV? What about The Getaway - they literally copied pretty much every street in London. Actually, why don't we sue every game company who's ever used a real location in their products?
    • thatsmyaibo, on 10/11/2007, -4/+26@azi

      So do you believe all the GTA games should be scrapped for using the exteriors too?

      (Twoodge, you beat me to it)
    • kenvsryu, on 10/11/2007, -19/+75In religion, fantasy is reality.
    • InetRoadkill, on 10/11/2007, -17/+32Organized religion sucks.
    • HunterTV, on 10/11/2007, -3/+15Off hand I would think it depends on if it's private or public property. Public, "fair use," private, needs permission.

      I've personally never heard of someone suing for using a depiction of a building in a game before, but maybe that's because permission was obtained in most cases. Did Michael Bay need to get permission from the owners of the Chrysler Building to destroy it in Armageddon? It's more or less the same thing; depiction of a building in a work of fiction.

    • Scarfy, on 10/11/2007, -5/+66OMG SHOOTING IS SO COOL I'M GOING TO GO SHOOT UP THE MANCHESTER CATHEDRAL BECAUSE ITS ENCOURAGED BY A VIDEO GAME
    • maoa, on 10/11/2007, -9/+19I don't think it's just that they used the Church's interior without permission - it's a whole game genre that goes against the Church's beliefs. It's a bit like a game using Jack Thompson's house as a location for a violent shoot-out - the main difference being that Manchester Cathedral is a public place. I agree that legal action would be overkill, but you can understand the Church getting a bit upset. Furthermore, the article does specifically say they are "considering" legal action rather than "pursuing", so we perhaps Sony will apologise over the phone and we'll hear no more about it.

      I'd have expected this kind of reaction from Manchester Cathedral, anyway. I live in Manchester and know the Canon's son, and I remember they held a faith-affirming "Da Vinci Mass" in reaction to Dan Brown's film... they advertised through parody billboard posters and the works. It's not the first time they've overreacted to popular culture.
    • Alphabet, on 10/11/2007, -17/+19@vx69

      what do you expect, it's organized religion. If they could understand the difference between fantasy and reality, they wouldn't believe in a god in the first place.
    • aegis9975, on 10/11/2007, -1/+40Human on mutant alien violence as depicted in Resistance: Fall of Man should be condemned. Period. Kudos for the Church for standing up for the rights of the Chimera.
    • meatmcguffin, on 10/11/2007, -6/+11"In religion, fantasy is reality."

      That's scary enough but the real danger is that in religion, reality is fantasy.
    • DaveDaveson, on 10/11/2007, -10/+4in terms of copyright, the outside of a building is fair game because its in plain sight. The interior is not. So as far as I understand the makers of thre game would have needed permision to use this.
    • gromnie, on 10/11/2007, -3/+13"in terms of copyright, the outside of a building is fair game because its in plain sight. The interior is not."

      Since construction began in 1215, the copyright holder is fairly certain to be long, long dead.

      Disney has fought (and bought) hard, but even they haven't managed to get copyright extended to 800 years. Surely the building, inside and out, is public domain by now?
    • JamesConnolly, on 10/11/2007, -7/+7@gromnie

      Wow. That was really dumb. You are obviously not a lawyer. It doesn't work that way. hahah if the present owner doesn't want the interior to be filmed, they don't have to allow it. Exterior is in plain sight, so that's slightly different.

      Has nothing to do with the "builder" in the 1200s. The owner is still the CoE.

      Blame the kings...I still do!
    • Isidore, on 10/11/2007, -16/+9This game uses the INSIDE of the cathedral, not the public domain outside (re arguments of NY skyline or earth from space).

      What if a shoot-em up used the INSIDE of Virginia Tech or Columbine as the setting?
      What if it used the inside of your house - would you have any intellectual property rights?
      Would you just get a life?

      At least the Church of England is threatening legal action - presumably on intellectual property grounds, rather than threatening violence.

      Imagine if a shoot-em-up involving terrorists featured the inside of a mosque or the Kaaba in Mecca. Would Sony only be worried about legal action? They wouldn't even dream of it. And many of the 'liberal/libertarian/secular' 'Digg Dhimmis would be saying how Islamophobic Sony was. But it's OK to attack Christainity.
    • gromnie, on 10/11/2007, -7/+6@JamesConnolly: "Wow. That was really dumb. You are obviously not a lawyer."

      Thank you for the compliment.

      Seeing as how I asked a civil question and all you could do was resort to name-calling, I suppose it would only be fair to return the favour and call you a scum-sucking *****. Or a lawyer. But I repeat myself.

      The cathedral is not a private building, is it? Since you are obviously such a brilliant lawyer, can you clearly explain on what grounds they can claim 'copyright' over the interior of an 800 year old building?
    • Tanyanika, on 10/11/2007, -6/+10There's an old quote here that begs to be rolled out:

      "Christianity - the belief that a cosmic jewish zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.....yeah, that makes perfect sense."

      Some people aren't exactly equipped to handle reality.
    • kitwaites, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4@Gromnie

      A cathedral isn't a public building, it's owned by the Church of England. They allow people free admission, but so do shops and pubs - it doesn't mean you have the right to use that building if the owner doesn't want you to. It's why they can chuck out drunks and homeless people - they reserve the right to admission.
    • BorisT, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5You guys keep saying "use" as if it was filmed like a movie, when it's really a rendition. Like a drawing.
    • smackhero, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2@JamesConnolly: you're an idiot.

      allowing someone to step onto your property and film or not isnt the same as having copyright over whether or not someone can recreate an environment in a game. they weren't stepping onto their property. the original poster is 100% correct, they don't have copyright (the right to reproduce) over the design of the cathedral's interior or exterior.
    • HBNDonut, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3"... photo-realistic quality... " WRONG!
    • ericrous, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Speaking as the guy who owns the image rights to the standard shipping crate, I would like to say that I hope this establishes a precedent.
    • Speachless, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Ok seriously that church must have nothing better to do then complain and bitch if they are going to make such a big deal out of this. I'm sorry for the language but i am so pissed off that anyone would even consider the notion that Sony should apologize at all, or give in to any of the demands that the church has made. First off the church has been lying to CNN which posted quotes from the church saying that this scene depicted "rival factions" having a gun battle in the church in which hundreds died. Ok now i am only going to say this once...anyone who has not played this game and seen this exact scene has no right to pass judgment on the game or Sony. I have played this game and the two "rival factions" are the U.S./British forces and the Chimera who are aliens. Ok, common sense here...since when have aliens and the Armies of either of the two nations been "rival factions"? This is their main argument, that they are trying to crack down on gang and gang related violence with guns in their city. But they cant even get their facts straight, and this controversy just furthers the stigma that almost all religious related groups are out of touch with our current culture and are ridiculously stubborn.
  • Gsm136, on 10/11/2007, -9/+12What a waste of time by the CoE.
    Shootouts happen in a lot of games e.g CoD, BF:1942 etc, I think in reality they were just steamed that they could have charged the makers a few pounds to use the Cathedral in the game.
    • ViRaZ, on 10/11/2007, -5/+10Except that the battles in CoD and BF1942 actually happened.
    • staticneuron, on 10/11/2007, -0/+11your right viraz, Sony would be much more justified if aliens actually invaded and we had a shootout with them at one point in time......
    • ICSU, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8"It is well known that Manchester has a gun crime problem,"

      At least they are ready for that alien invasion.
    • HBNDonut, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2"For a global manufacturer to re-create one of our great cathedrals and then encourage people to have guns battles in the building is beyond belief and highly irresponsible."

      So... basically they're saying that it's OK to play with guns on the outside of the building.
    • petepete, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I would take pity on any invading alien army that lands in Levenshulme or Longsight
  • DatuPuti, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6They really should go out more in order to differentiate reality from fantasty games.
    • ericrous, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3It's a damn shame to see the Church of England taking such a pro-alien stance. Do they really care more about the aliens' well-being than the well-being of their fellow humans? Reminds me of the Catholic Church's complicity with Nazis and Fascists. Will we never learn?
  • Dumbledorito, on 10/11/2007, -1/+21Any similar problems with Hellgate: London?
  • hiPpymIck, on 10/11/2007, -6/+41"seeking legal action"
    FTA
    "The Church of England is considering legal action"

    big difference
    • Eastlygod, on 10/11/2007, -1/+43The article was updated after I submitted it - the description I added was straight from the article at the time it was submitted.
  • beetlejuice101, on 10/11/2007, -1/+12Its SciFi for god sake, no different to a TV show or a book... again these guys proberly haven't even seen the game in true action or understand the plot/background story.

    Its not like the cathedral has been portrayed in a GTA style game with mass murders of innocent people inside, its a bloody SciFi war game with where the good guys fight the bad guys!
  • jacksons98, on 10/11/2007, -5/+20This is totally insane. What's next the state of Hawaii sues the makers of "Lost."
    • dunezone, on 10/11/2007, -3/+11Nah, they'll go after Spielberg for Jurassic Park instead.
    • homagenz, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2No, because they got permissions.
  • Caiman, on 10/11/2007, -1/+26You'd think they'd appreciate the free advertising. Who knew such exciting events could take place inside a cathedral?
  • grumbel, on 10/11/2007, -2/+41Shouldn't any copyright on that buildings have expired a few eons ago?
    • AntidoteSqrd, on 10/11/2007, -6/+4I laughed for like 5 minutes after reading that :).
  • ahpro, on 10/11/2007, -5/+29I'd just like to point out that not all us brits are stuck-up like that. :-)
    • odiHnaD, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1The Brits can't be that stuck up, in certain bus lines they have a sign that says "Ladies no dancing" above the poles ;-)
  • halosniper7, on 10/11/2007, -27/+8"more than one million copies,"
    wow they must be giving a copy away with the ps3
    • admirabumblebee, on 10/11/2007, -21/+18It's a pretty badass game.

      Much better than gears (4 month #2 in assassination)... Longer and more engaging single player and significantly more exciting and varied multiplayer experience.
    • Zoids, on 10/11/2007, -4/+12@ Admirabumblebee

      I wouldn't say it's better than Gears, but it's definately one of the best PS3 titles available here.
    • admirabumblebee, on 10/11/2007, -13/+25Well... I use to play gears religously, nearly 9 hours a day (I own my own business) since it came out, as well as all my friends. It is by no means a bad game at all.

      Then I ponied up for a ps3 and suddenly everyone drops gears for RFOM. Some even SOLD their xbox's for the game, of course those people were morons, but it does get my point across.

      There's a lot of depth in resistance if you take a deep look, and there's an update coming soon (week or so?) with free maps and whatnot.

      If ANYTHING, resistance MP doesnt have 7 12 year olds screaming profanities at the top of their lungs and bitching about lag. That in itself is worth the price of admission.

      ---

      edit: I just noticed my top comment went up to +15 then down to -1 while i wrote this post. Jeez, fanboy much? I always keep forgetting digg's irrational buttsecks with the wii60.
    • Ragnar0k, on 10/11/2007, -3/+15Being able to afford a PS3 as well as being able to play on a console 9 hours a day?

      Man, I need to get into your line of work. Screw studying physics.

      ``Rag
    • admirabumblebee, on 10/11/2007, -3/+11I dont waste my money on cable tv, eating out, leases, credit cards/loans etc...

      Make your own food, only buy what you have money IN your hand to buy and learn to live without stuff you'll end up bitching about anyways (tv, internet, expensive shoes/shirts/pants or whatever).

      Hell, a ps3 and a couple games cost less than 1 year of cable tv (which is about $60 a month here), and it's a lot more entertaining.

      I'd post my website but that'd probably not go over too well. I make high-end sport kites for a living :)
    • foolfromhell, on 10/11/2007, -3/+7"(tv, internet, expensive shoes/shirts/pants or whatever)."
      So... you play on your PS3 without a TV, you comment on Digg without an internet connection, and you dont wear Shirts or pants?
      Wow...
      A naked man who can connect to the internet without a connection and imagine a TV to play on his PS3...
    • BlackMask, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1@Admirabumblebee you're my hero
  • fragged23, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10how lame do you have to be. everyone wants to sue sony, must be what all the cool companies are doing now-a-days...
  • GhostToon, on 10/11/2007, -6/+17How long until Jack Thompson calls the church? He is crazy enough to think he can practice law in the UK.
    • neiltc13, on 10/11/2007, -8/+6He has nothing to do with this - people constantly bringing his name up is what raises his profile and thus potential earnings. If you don't like him, forget about him, don't do him the courtesy of mentioning him all the time.
    • ICSU, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4He is crazy enough to think he can practice law, period.
  • 1mabu77fac3, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3those bugs in that stage really pissed me off. i had hardly any amo and then you have to take on those two big dudes, took a while to finally beat.
    • Zoids, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8Save the ammo from the shotgun in the level before, it makes the cathedral a breeze. Oh, and take down one of the Howlers with a grenade to get the "Fetch!" skill point.
    • bashar129, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8The big guys are easy to kill, shotgun to the face seems to do the trick. Just dodge and weave around the Auger fire.
  • Nick22, on 10/11/2007, -4/+10For christ sake, this is almost like having to ask the US government for permission to set a game in one of their cities. Hell, if a game had a scene that took place in my house, id be overjoyed!
    • redxii, on 10/11/2007, -3/+10If you make a game of a real city, you'll be sent to Gitmo accused that it was for terrorist training purposes.
    • blackjack75, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6Well you might do nothing and be sent to Gitmo anyway, so I'd go for the game.
    • gikeymarcia, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5hmmm.. you almost do have to ask permission. Remember how Vegas got all pissed off about the newest Rainbow 6. *****, even Meixco made a stink when part of GRAW2 was set there. GTA4 isn't even calling their city New York yet they're still pissed. Bottom line: people fear what they don't understand.
    • neiltc13, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Except this is a game set in the United Kingdom based on that country for a console made in Japan.

      Why does everything have to have something to do with the US on this site? This doesn't.
    • knowitman, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Because even though the game takes place in England, on a Japanese console, it was designed by an American developer.
    • illegalcortex, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1@neiltc13

      Also, because human stupidity is a constant across cultures?

      Would you rather the posters on this site (the large majority of which are American) try to use examples from the UK? Wouldn't that be a bit difficult?
  • Zoids, on 10/11/2007, -12/+6I hate the church even more now.
  • PhillAholic, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8I can't see this going anywhere. It's not like every single movie production that has used the New York skyline has gone around to every building owner and asked permission to do so. If they were aloud to come in and take pictures, then they should be aloud to use it in a SciFi game. What if I post a picture of me in the church next to a picture of me with a gun? Are they going to sue me for having both on my site?
  • Travis182, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8Just from the point of ownership...shouldn't a company acquire permission before using interiors of a building? Movie studios need permission to go shoot a movie in someone's building and put it on the screen, don't video game companies need permission to use someone's property whether it's based on reality or not?
    • soulscreme, on 10/11/2007, -3/+17Well, I can't say for sure as I am not knowledgeable of British law. It seems that Sony asked permission and was granted it, but now the church claims that the permission was only granted for the exterior and not the interior.

      The whole thing is ridiculous, in the game it is set up as an abandoned field hospital. This was frequent in Europe during the real events of WWII. It's not like you are killing humans or innocents inside the church. You are killing alien monsters.

      I'm just happy because for once it isn't my church, the Catholic Church, looking like a bunch of loons.
    • mitrovarr, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7Actually, I'd say no. If writers have to get the owner's permission to use any buildings, businesses, names, etc. in their products, fiction set in the real world will cease to exist. There is just no way you could get the permission of everyone, especially since a lot of legal departments will just give you a flat 'no' since it's the safest answer, and a lot of places will require money or product placement or some other crap.

      The interior of the church is not trademarked, copywrited, or patented, so I have no idea what legal basis the church thinks it has, anyway.
    • SolipsistD, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7INAL but in the UK is not really a question of copyright on building interiors, but photographing without permission can be a trespass. However, I've heard a statement from Sony saying that they had all 'necessary permissions' and the views of the Cathedral's interior in the game are all in-game rendered and not photographic in any case.

      What would be more fun, would be if the church thought they could sue under religious law. England is still old fashioned enough and stupid enough not to have repealed the law of blasphemy. Even better, and less well known, is that England (and several other countries) still have the remnants of a completely separate legal system of Ecclesiastical Courts. These are run by the church and cover religious matters and some acts that take place on church property.

      We are already seeing the US government wanting to extend civil tax law to transactions that take place in Second Life and other virtual realities, so perhaps the Church of England will want to try and extend the jurisdiction of the Ecclesiastical Courts to acts that take place in a virtual representation of one of their churches. Perhaps these virtual aliens had claimed sanctuary within the cathedral - that might make it illegal to shoot them ;-)
    • homagenz, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I don't know what you're doing talking sense. Can't you see nerds are bashing religion here? Way to ruin everyone's fun.
  • Phatern, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4Really, they need to shut the hell up. Who really looks at a game like this and then says, "Wow I didn't know that crazy gun fights went on at the cathedral in manchester, it must be a really bad place to go."? Maybe if it was supposed to be a real story or something that is trying to recreat actual past events that happened, but this isn't even close. So stupid.
  • supermanred, on 10/11/2007, -2/+13This whole thing is stupid,

    does Doctor Who now have to get prermission from the Queen to fly a flying saucer into Big Ben? Will future episodes of the Simpsons need permission to feature American landmarks in them? How will this court action affect future and past movies / games? I bet you many existing places have been re-created in hollywood studios or in 3d worlds for video games in the past without permission. Will the makers of any movie featuring Iraq now be forced to pull their movies off the shelf until the Iraqi government or the specific landmarks in Iraq that are re-created give permission or recieve royalties?

    This is sooo stupid. The Bishop should be concentrating on keeping his priests from raping little boys in the back room and turn off his PS3. If anything, more kids will want to see the Cathedral after helping to save the world in a video game in which part of the righteous battle to save the world occurred inside the cathedral.

    • homagenz, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Aaaaand there's our "rofl churches ***** children" reference. Congratulations.
  • bashar129, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9I'm a religious person and I think this whole thing is absolutely absurd. Believing that having the cathedral in the game will in any way inhibit people from visiting or make them think that taking a gun to church is a good idea is absolutely ridiculous. It's sickening that people actually believe that these games are the cause of the violence in the world.
    • soulscreme, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7I'm in the same boat and I completely agree. Especially with it being an alternate take on the WWII era. In that era churches were frequently used as field hospitals, shelters, and military encampments. It's not like they made the scenario up out of thin air. It's part of being historically accurate. I'm not 100% sure, but I'd imagine that games like Call of Duty or Medal of Honor have had similar scenarios as it is part of the time period. And in those games you are killing human beings, not alien monsters. It is a shame that people in positions of power in the religious community seem to act so frequently without applying reason. I'm willing to bet that this bishop hasn't even seen the area played and has no clue as to the context in which the scene occurs.
    • jedikv, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I agree you as well (also in the same boat).
  • Kingfisherx, on 10/11/2007, -1/+12There's already precedent for this ***** and the CoE is on the wrong side. They had the same problem filming scenes for the Da Vinci Code. The Vatican refused Ron Howard access to shoot on site. So what did they do? They recreated all the cathedrals digitally from the ground up. Guess what that means? Brand new property rights cause virtual works are a brand new piece of art asset, which belongs to the creator. Just because you inspire something doesn't entitle you to owning what you inspire.
  • MrGwain, on 10/11/2007, -10/+3I'll against the grain on this one. I don't think its in good taste to have a shoot-a-thon in a virtual space that many consider spiritual and holy. There's not many sacred spaces left in our culture. Everything is up for grabs these days. Fair enough, but lets leave people's holy places alone in depictions of violence?

    Oh and for the record I am a gamer and a Church goer. I just like to keep my Half Life 2'ing and Mass separate thanks all the same :)
    • supermanred, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Nobody's holy place is off limits in war. American soldiers have blown up quite a few Mosques in Iraq, wether inadvertently or because they had no other choice. I know we try to avoid destroying holy sites, but when it becomes life or death in war, all soldiers would say the same thing "fire the missle". The game isn't about destroying churches or destroying the world. You are SAVING the world as a good person on the side of good fighting against evil, and the battle happens to take you inside a church. Get over it.
    • mmortal03, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Watch out. Don't give anybody any ideas. Someone might make a video game depicting Mecca and have Non-Muslims killing aliens there.
  • JabusMaximus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Thats ridiculous!
    They need to chill, i mean, how could some one with so much 'wisdom' be so dull?
    Any person who claims they commited a crime because of a game is a liar, everyone know's the difference between right or wrong and because of that, whatever they do cannot be caused/excused because of a video game.
  • n1pz, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6They must be sniffing some cash opportunity here. They can't be opposed to the violence, it's the violence that got Christianity where it is today!
  • JabusMaximus, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0Oh and Soulscreme, you are totally correct, COD is more realistic than R.F.O.M and yet that has many cathedrals that planes crash into and you battle in, they were never in a legal standhold like this!
  • VitriolAndAngst, on 10/11/2007, -7/+0I was taking a tour of the Vatican... and learned that the Sistine Chapel was actually refurbished by Sony (they paid the money). I think that it might be possible that they actually OWN copyright to some Vatican art and architecture as an "investor."

    Puts a strange twist to the story. The Catholic Church might have forgotten that they sold a little piece of themselves off to a corporation.

    Not that they own the Manchester Church. But if they really wanted to annoy them, they could have a shoot-out in the Sistine Chapel.
  • Lassan, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1This is just ridculous.
  • ChrisofKent, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4As a resident of Manchester, I've emailed the CoE; basically just saying that I thought their comments were misguided, and that it was after all only a game, based in an alternative (dystopian!) world which was in no way condoning or encouraging gun violence. If they really wanted to help with sorting out gun problems, there are a lot of things they could be doing.

    I await a response...

    Also I would like to email Sony and tell them to stick by their guns and not to back down.
  • ChairShot83, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5I can't believe it took them this long to get to that part of the game. Did they also just find out that Shiek is actually Zelda?
  • wannabenomad, on 10/11/2007, -7/+3Please note that this is coming from a non-religious person who does enjoy Sony games.

    This isn't a "Religion vs First Amendment" issue for you guys to get all excited about. The Church of England was unhappy about their cathedral being used without their permission. Someone making a movie would have to gain permission to shoot the interior, so why not the makers of a video game? The exact reasons why the church leaders were uncomfortable with the game don't matter, nor do your views on the validity of those reasons.

    Notice that it is the Church of England (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_england), not the Catholic Church, which so many of you keep mentioning.

    So go ahead, digg me down now.
    • ChairShot83, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2So, by your theory George Lucas should be giving royalties to NASA.

      Hell, film makers are finding it easier and easier just to build an entire set than to film on location with as many restrictions that go with it.
    • ChrisofKent, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Listening to an interview with a representative of the Church on the radio, he stated that even if the action had taken place in an entirely made up church, he would still have called for the withdrawal of the game. He also stated that if it had been the 'holy place' of any other religion the Government would have been involved in calling for the game's withdrawal.

      I am sure that this is not the case.
    • jordanlund, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"Someone making a movie would have to gain permission to shoot the interior, so why not the makers of a video game?"

      Because shooting a movie in the Cathedral requires physically being there, putting it in a game does not. It would be like the church telling a novelist they can't use the Cathedral in their book.
  • 355spider, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3ChrisofKent, I believe Hitman 2 was removed and then edited for having the final levels set in a Sikh temple/hospital with most of your enemies being sikhs.
    • gikeymarcia, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Think that ***** would have happened if the last level was in a Sikh temple/hospital and most of your enemies were ALIENS!?!
  • ant4177, on 10/11/2007, -7/+4Come on, we all know the church would use any excuse to go after the gaming industry. Why is everyone so suprised?
    • homagenz, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1What on Earth are you talking about?
  • wannabenomad, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3@ChrisofKent
    You have a valid point, and I agree that what he said in the interview was completely ridiculous. My only point is that the Church of England does have a say in how the interior of their buildings are used... especially when another company (Sony) is profiting off of it.
    Many cathedrals won't even allow interior photography, and I wouldn't be surprised if this makes that ban more widespread.
  • Gegius, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2Well, guess what? I still going to play Resistance: Fall of Man. Ain't no church going to stop me from gaming.
    • BlackMask, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1***** churches. Let's kill some mofos in RFOM
  • EbowUK, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10Shame on the BBC for sensationalist reporting.

    Must be a quiet day in the damn Big Brother house...
  • robuk24, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6I just watched the BBC's 10pm news item on it.... ARGH! Stupid reporter. So what if people are offended by a computer game! I get offended everyday by random stuff but I don't want to start banning ***** or suing people.

    Its when they started to talk about gun culture and how violent games are linked to the problem that I went out and murdered my entire neighbourhood.
  • knodi, on 10/11/2007, -8/+1Does any one even give a damn Resistance sucks balls.
  • gwolf, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8Didn't call of Duty 2 do exactly the same thing; why are they just picking on resistance?
  • damnyooneek, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5its a damn money thing. the church of england can go suck a *****. if resistance sold only a 1,000 copies no one would be on their ass.
  • loki1584, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2They own the building, not the intellectual property rights to its image. Photographing the interior is not an intellectual property issue, it is a trespass and control issue. I assume there are images of this cathedral all over the place anyway which they could employ in their recreation. Just like they could draw it on their own, they can paint it in pixels.
  • Topher06, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Why should they care, because religion has never had anything to do with war?
    • Isidore, on 10/11/2007, -5/+4Atheists (Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Hitler?) killed more people in the 20th century than all the 'religious wars' combined.
    • gromnie, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2These so-called Atheists didn't kill in the name of or because of their faith (or lack of it). They did it because they were murderous psychopaths. Can't say the same for the Crusaders and Jihadists, ancient and modern.

      And Hitler was born and raised a Catholic, and attended a monastery school.

      Besides, "But *HE* did it" is such a poor excuse, isn't it?
    • Isidore, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2But the Nazis and Atheistic Communists killed many precisely because of their faith/ideology.

      Hitler and many leading Nazis formally renounced their Catholicism and Lutheranism, something which is possible in Germany due to the tax system collecting church tithes from believers.

      People bring up the Crusades and Inquisitions as if present-day Catholics do this today or Pope Benedict 16th incites war. It's a bit like blaming all white people for slavery (which was more recent).
  • lukewind, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1Oh no....the insane people who believe there is an invisible man in the sky who knows all are mad. What ever will intelligent people do?
  • DAVIBE, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2anybody got the pics of the interiors of both RFOM & the Church?
    so we can compare.
  • fallenone05, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6The Greeks should sue Sony over having their gods in the God of War games.
  • RationalXubrnce, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1 Historically an animated show could render any real place on earth without permission, a computer simuilation should be no different.
  • ruddy, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3"Resistance: Fall of Man is a fantasy science fiction game and is not based on reality." - perfect, neither is the church of england
  • Ubergoober3, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2That was a fun level. Cathedral of Manchester sorry for leaving leaper parts on your floor.
  • Bodhesatva, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Rationalxubrnce said: "Historically an animated show could render any real place on earth without permission, a computer simuilation should be no different."

    That's a good example, thank you. I'd point out that this isn't true for actual movies -- clearly, the legality is tied to the level of detail and realism portrayed. I think it sounds like they don't have a case, but this game is a lot closer to precision and reality than most cartoons get with similar depictions.

    At the very least, it's not an absurd legal claim.
  • formulathree, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3
    Church of England - Thanks for the free publicity and helping us sell another million copies of Resistance Fall of Man.

    Sincerely,

    Insomniac.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 72 of 72 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.