Why do countries like Germany, Australia, and New Zealand censor so much in games?

[U]

So I’m sure we all know about how Germany has to have edited versions of games sold there. They can’t have violence in their games much. And many games are outright banned. (We all know how Germany has always loved to ban books especially during the wars, it’s unsurprising they ban games now.)

But Australia and New Zealand (they copy each other) both ban many games too. On basis of them being too violent or too sexual, usually.

I think that’s pretty dumb. If you think it’s too much then just put an 18+ rating on it.

A good example of a banned or censored game is Postal 2, I think it’s banned in Australia and New Zealand, and banned or edited in Germany.

Do you think the elderly politicians are correct to decide what games their subjects can play? Or do you think these countries should make freedom of speech laws to protect all games?

[Gus the Crocodile]

davidb11님이 먼저 게시:

I'm not sure what that has to do with censorship at all though.

You’re right that RC is the “banning” part of the topic, not the “censoring” part, but given that you said Australia has “stopped doing that”, I assumed you were referring to something it was doing in the first place.

[davidb11]

Gus the Crocodile님이 먼저 게시:

davidb11님이 먼저 게시:

I'm not sure what that has to do with censorship at all though.

You’re right that RC is the “banning” part of the topic, not the “censoring” part, but given that you said Australia has “stopped doing that”, I assumed you were referring to something it was doing in the first place.

OH. Okay.
THank you for explaining.
My bad.

[☮ne✟rue𝓢ax☯n]

permanent name님이 먼저 게시:

☮ne✟rue𝓢ax☯n님이 먼저 게시:

Do you have any proof to back up those claims?

Yes the BIS forwarded me a memo about it. /s

It’s a UK-owned company. Do you dispute that?

Still not seeing any proof here.

Unsure why you are focusing on Tencent. I'm asking for proof that confirms your claim about the UK government.

I've never heard about it, that's why I want proof, so that I can then make an informed decision, instead of just taking the word of some random on the internet.

[☮ne✟rue𝓢ax☯n]

Amuro0079님이 먼저 게시:

☮ne✟rue𝓢ax☯n님이 먼저 게시:

China's worse. They even limit the amount of game time under 18's can have per day.

Last I heard that only applied to online games. They can still play offline single player games unlimited.

You could well be correct. I'm getting mixed messages depending where I read. Some say online gaming, whilst others just say video gaming.

Either way it sucks, and I'm glad I'm a UK gamer where we are pretty much left alone.

[AustrAlien2010]

Oh. So they do not censor anything. I understand better now.

[Dracoco OwO]

☮ne✟rue𝓢ax☯n님이 먼저 게시:

Amuro0079님이 먼저 게시:

Last I heard that only applied to online games. They can still play offline single player games unlimited.

You could well be correct. I'm getting mixed messages depending where I read. Some say online gaming, whilst others just say video gaming.

Either way it sucks, and I'm glad I'm a UK gamer where we are pretty much left alone.

It's weird that it only apply to online games..but considering they are minors it's understandable.

[permanent name]

☮ne✟rue𝓢ax☯n님이 먼저 게시:

Still not seeing any proof here.

Unsure why you are focusing on Tencent. I'm asking for proof that confirms your claim about the UK government.

I've never heard about it, that's why I want proof, so that I can then make an informed decision, instead of just taking the word of some random on the internet.

Green gunner님이 먼저 게시:

permanent name님이 먼저 게시:

Yes the BIS forwarded me a memo about it. /s

It’s a UK-owned company. Do you dispute that?

I suppose this is City of London Corporation type of shenaningans, regarding Tencent & the HK movement?

I should preface this by saying I don’t necessarily see a difference between the UK government and UK corporate interests. Especially given things like the City of London’s special status in parliament, and the long history of the UK’s national interests being enacted by their publishing outfits.

If you deny these things then you simply deny history and I don’t think there’s any point in talking.

TenCent is mostly owned by Naspers, which got its start from the UK diversifying its publishing outfits to better serve their African interests. It wound up absorbing most of their non-US, non-European publishers at the time.

In the process of Naspers buying its stake in TenCent when it was just a fledgling culture importer, supposedly after its CEOs had some meetings in HK, a number of their publishing outlets and associated copyrights wound up in TenCent’s hands. In fact most of them did, minus a few especially large and important ones.

The intent behind this buyout was to take advantage of the Shenzhen region as a way to drown China in so much money that it chokes on it. Starts becoming corrupt, invests in way too many things, gradually becomes the sole owner of most copyrights, and essentially becoming a gigantic and monolithic blockage in their overall economy that is too huge to deal with. Because the same thing happened to the UK from their own monolithic interests during the British Empire days. Which is why things are more diversified today.

99% of TenCent’s profits go to China, but it’s still owned by the UK via Naspers.

The reason Blizzard banned some people from esports for supporting HK was resoundingly blamed on TenCent, with almost no coverage disputing this fact. It became a huge issue and motivated a lot of anti-China sentiments because people don’t understand how TenCent is organized and who actually owns it. This in turn got spun into a great deal of support for HK independence.

Is that enough?

[videomike_Ultimate_Plushie]

Because obsessive mroal standards. In these places there's a cultural hallmark of forcibly preventing anything the country deems morally negative to ever public, especially when it comes to politics(which doesn't effect games as much by comparison.) As one poster said, moral totalitarianism.

Edit: No, I dont blame coronations. Most corporate ideas started as grassroots from others and then spread by neoptism and social dogmatism common among the upper class where disagreements in ideals can and often does lead to socio-economic conflicts and collapse. And even then most if it just protection of a desired ingroup they see as worth protecting, rather than outgroup hatred(expect in Germany)

[Angel]

In Australia it's usually violence, sexual violence and/or drug references that are too high that it won't be suitable for our laws. Personally I prefer if they ban these types of games.

[davidb11]

permanent name님이 먼저 게시:

☮ne✟rue𝓢ax☯n님이 먼저 게시:

Still not seeing any proof here.

Unsure why you are focusing on Tencent. I'm asking for proof that confirms your claim about the UK government.

I've never heard about it, that's why I want proof, so that I can then make an informed decision, instead of just taking the word of some random on the internet.

Green gunner님이 먼저 게시:

I suppose this is City of London Corporation type of shenaningans, regarding Tencent & the HK movement?

I should preface this by saying I don’t necessarily see a difference between the UK government and UK corporate interests. Especially given things like the City of London’s special status in parliament, and the long history of the UK’s national interests being enacted by their publishing outfits.

If you deny these things then you simply deny history and I don’t think there’s any point in talking.

TenCent is mostly owned by Naspers, which got its start from the UK diversifying its publishing outfits to better serve their African interests. It wound up absorbing most of their non-US, non-European publishers at the time.

In the process of Naspers buying its stake in TenCent when it was just a fledgling culture importer, supposedly after its CEOs had some meetings in HK, a number of their publishing outlets and associated copyrights wound up in TenCent’s hands. In fact most of them did, minus a few especially large and important ones.

The intent behind this buyout was to take advantage of the Shenzhen region as a way to drown China in so much money that it chokes on it. Starts becoming corrupt, invests in way too many things, gradually becomes the sole owner of most copyrights, and essentially becoming a gigantic and monolithic blockage in their overall economy that is too huge to deal with. Because the same thing happened to the UK from their own monolithic interests during the British Empire days. Which is why things are more diversified today.

99% of TenCent’s profits go to China, but it’s still owned by the UK via Naspers.

The reason Blizzard banned some people from esports for supporting HK was resoundingly blamed on TenCent, with almost no coverage disputing this fact. It became a huge issue and motivated a lot of anti-China sentiments because people don’t understand how TenCent is organized and who actually owns it. This in turn got spun into a great deal of support for HK independence.

Is that enough?

You have zero evidence of your claims.
Don't be silly and paradoxically bigoted against England. :P

England is not guilty of the kind of Malchavellian Super Villain schemes you are claiming they are.
England has no reason to do the things you claim. They would rather invade France tomorrow. :P
Yes, France would immediately nuke London, but that's not the point. :P

[sleeps]

my country did the censorship funny

there was one game about gods and my country proceed to ban an entire steam because of this game alone

minor one is that they also ban postal 2 only to unban it years later for some reason. glad

[U]

Angel님이 먼저 게시:

In Australia it's usually violence, sexual violence and/or drug references that are too high that it won't be suitable for our laws. Personally I prefer if they ban these types of games. :marijaonlooker:

If I were Australian I’d be mad that the faat old politicians are trying to decide what I can enjoy. I’m glad I wasn’t born into Australia.

(Some Australians are cool people just I hate their government and politicians)

[videomike_Ultimate_Plushie]

Lovecraft's Neko님이 먼저 게시:

Angel님이 먼저 게시:

In Australia it's usually violence, sexual violence and/or drug references that are too high that it won't be suitable for our laws. Personally I prefer if they ban these types of games. :marijaonlooker:

If I were Australian I’d be mad that the faat old politicians are trying to decide what I can enjoy. I’m glad I wasn’t born into Australia.

(Some Australians are cool people just I hate their government and politicians)

Indeed. Their government likes to play moral arbiter so stupidly highly it's kind of insane. That's always been the case in politics, but usually it's kept to smaller more private arms like the AMPA was. Australia tends to be one of the bigger censors that isnt flat communist

[permanent name]

davidb11님이 먼저 게시:

You have zero evidence of your claims.
Don't be silly and paradoxically bigoted against England. :P

England is not guilty of the kind of Malchavellian Super Villain schemes you are claiming they are.
England has no reason to do the things you claim. They would rather invade France tomorrow. :P
Yes, France would immediately nuke London, but that's not the point. :P

I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic here, despite all the smileys. I’d rather not assume.

But, yes, Machiavelli wrote his treatises based on the normal day-to-day operations of the monarchy, and most of the climate crisis can be blamed on English-style industry. Which they destroyed all competition to just like they destroyed all their trees.

For the most part France and the UK are of one mind about this stuff. They just disagree about which ones the top dog.

[davidb11]

Please stop spreading lies here. We don't do that.
That's not how the real world works.

I'm leaving this thread, the moderation on this forum no longer exists. I give up.
You all win!

Bye!