PlayStation Will Refund Stellar Blade Digital Copies Over Claim Of False Advertisement

PlayStation will refund digital copies of Shift Up's latest action adventure game, Stellar Blade, over the claim of false advertisement.

Read Full Story >>
CrimsonWing6986d ago (Edited 86d ago )

You know what’s funny? I bet you if a game like GTA 6 that said it was going to be uncensored then went ahead and censored content and people wanted refunds, you wouldn’t be speechless.

What I don’t get is how is this difficult to see how this has become sending a message to the industry? People want this to stop no matter how small you think it is or dumb, they just want there to be no censorship. Had Shift Up just up and came out with the censored outfits and toned down blood effects from the beginning and never showed off the uncensored stuff this wouldn’t have been an issue. It’s the principle behind the changes that irked many.

How do you propose people go about trying to let Sony know to knock off this censorship? And if this was the outfit always intended and not censorship, then why won’t Shift Up just include the outfit as it was before? Case would’ve been closed and everyone but the SJW crowd would be happy.

staticall86d ago

Freaking A, man. I can't fathom why it's so hard to understand for some people. It's duffel bag from Fallout 69 all over again, they advertise one thing and you're getting the other. And it doesn't matter how small the change is. And those changes are never made in customers favor, quite the opposite. This is why we can't have nice things. And some people are defending this, pfffft.

And before people claim it's not censorship or it was unfinished model or whatever - every change was "cover this up", "tone down that". This is telling. And there's a really easy change to satisfy both - make both old and censored versions as separate costumes, problem solved. But nope, why can't they do that? Or add a switch "How much blood you want on Eve body during gory scenes?" with options "Like before", "Toned down" and "No blood". Then developers keep their promise of no censorship, everyone is happy. But, again, no.

Babadook786d ago

Was there any evidence that Sony censored the product as opposed to Shift Up? I thought the director said it was his decision.

CrimsonWing6986d ago (Edited 86d ago )


Have you seen their previous mobile games like Nikke? Have you seen the post censorship patches they’ve released? The coverups are the same.

The game was shipped with those costumes already done… this wasn’t a work in progress. It’s not a single outfit, either. Tons of promotional material showed various outfits that have been censored.

Have you seen Sony’s stance on game censorship? Oh and what about the blood spilling all over her? Did you know Sony has censored violent/gory content in the past? Look up Martha is Dead… only censored on Sony’s platform.

Do you really think Shift Up is going to bite the hand that feeds them by throwing Sony under the bus? Why the need to “discuss internally?” If it’s truly in the hands of the devs and Sony has no influence on the decision whatsoever, why not just include them back into the game?

Now, I’m no detective, but can we put two and two together?

romulus2385d ago

I would be. It's ridiculous for anyone to want a refund over a change to one characters outfit becasue you can't then ogle a digital characters hips and cleavage regardless of what game it was.

Profchaos85d ago (Edited 85d ago )

I live in Australia I'm first in line to buy GTA games and it's worth noting the GTA v is the only game in the series since GTA 3 that has arrived uncensored here. With Rockstar so used to censoring the game they volunteer to remove the blood soaked clothes aspect of IV before ratings submission.

Point is we don't know what we will lose at all pre GTA SA we sat around trying to figure that out will we have to have burglary cut will the came get banned outright etc and it's still the number one selling game and small aspects of the game like the ability to pick up hookers and select your service don't even enter gamers minds when buying a game like GTA because the reality is yeah it's there but how often are you likely to do it.

When I look at the stellar blade thing this is so extraordinarily minor I just don't get how it got so far it's a small aspects in the front of a character you spend 80 percent of the time looking at from behind

Babadook785d ago (Edited 85d ago )


I wasn’t asking for detective work. So I see no evidence it was Sony. Just wanted to check if there was any. The dev did claim responsibility. Maybe they were forced, maybe not. Let’s not claim it was Sony without evidence to back it up. All evidence as of now is to the contrary. IE the developer claims they did this internally and are looking into a resolution internally.

CrimsonWing6985d ago (Edited 85d ago )


If history has shown us anything it’s to not always believe things at face value. Sony has a history of extreme censorship. Shift Up has had a history of being forced to put out censored patches for their work. Do you know how they censor their games? I’ll give you a hint, it’s exactly the same way they did for several of the outfits in this game. You don’t make an outfit with strategically placed holes one way to show off assets and then all of a sudden patch covering the exposed skin out.

If you think Shift Up is going to say, “Sony made us do it,” then you’re incredibly naive. They are the distributor and have now established a business relationship. It’s not far fetched to believe Sony wanted to save face and said Shift Up can say whatever as long as they don’t mention them.

Do we know? Of course not, but OJ Simpson said he didn’t “do it,” and when you look back at all the history and put two and two together you can see why most people didn’t say, “Well he said he didn’t do it, so that’s that!”

Open your eyes. When you make a game like this and show promotional material with unaltered outfits and have them included in the shipped out game… it makes no sense that at the last minute they were like, “Oh these are really the designs we meant all along! Damn the pre-production and years spent already finalizing the outfits and blood effects. This is REALLY what we wanted.”

You can be some blind fanboy, but again it ain’t like Sony doesn’t have a heavy censor hammer they like to use. There’s an incredible amount of examples of it being used and unfairly against Asian developed games. Let me add to the fact that there is NO nudity and NO sexual content in this game… yet they tone it down on the blood spilling on the character that washes off in the rain scene and altered multiple outfits, specifically covering exposed skin in an outfit that IS designed to expose skin. 🤷‍♂️

But hey, you’re free to believe what you want, just as we all are.

Babadook785d ago (Edited 85d ago )

“If you think Shift Up is going to say, “Sony made us do it,” then you’re incredibly naive.”

Why? Where’s the proof? You bring up the issue of other platforms. Was there proof of it there? In Stellar there are more revealing pieces of clothing left untouched. Which makes it seem the devs reason is correct.

“They are the distributor and have now established a business relationship. It’s not far fetched to believe Sony wanted to save face and said Shift Up can say whatever as long as they don’t mention them.”

It’s too far fetched to make your assumptions. Yes. The dev could easily have said the truth.

CrimsonWing6985d ago (Edited 85d ago )


Yea, we can keep doing this endless waltz, here. I think this is just one of those situations where we’ll just have to agree to disagree.

You think this is Shift Up’s decision. I think it’s a Sony decision. That’s just where we are and neither one of us is going to convince the other differently.

Babadook784d ago (Edited 84d ago )


The big difference you need to bear in mind is you’re the one making the claim (accusation) and have the burden of proof therefore. I don’t.

CrimsonWing6984d ago


I can live with that burden just fine, buddy.

Babadook783d ago (Edited 83d ago )

You can live without meeting your burden I guess. What choice do you have? There’s no proof of anything you’ve claimed.

CrimsonWing6983d ago (Edited 83d ago )


Yea that’s what criminals try to say when they’re hoping not to get caught and yet them detective skills seem to break that down.

“Oh you don’t have any proof!”

Yep, just Y’know Sony’s past history with censorship, Skill Up strategic fabric to cover their previous designs in games that received censored patches, and how a game shipped after going gold with unaltered blood effects and outfits, but then a 2nd patch made them the way they’re “supposed” to be… as if years of game development and pre production designs somehow only quickly got finished after not the 1st patch, but the 2nd 🙄. Like, these outfits with strategically placed holes to expose skin, but to cover up the front of the chest… which is sort of the pattern you’re seeing in the censored designs. Let’s also pretend like they didn’t just enter into a business relationship with Sony and can’t exactly throw them under the bus to ruin said new relationship…

Y’know what this is like? It’s like the kid who wasn’t allowed to get in the cookie jar. You come to find out there’s cookies missing and when you confront him he says, “I didn’t do it, you don’t have evidence!” Yet there’s a cookie crumb trail leading to him and he has that sh*t all over his mouth… but hey he said he didn’t do it and I don’t have proof, what can you do but live a burdened life 🤷‍♂️

Sometimes I wish I didn’t have common sense and could believe everything I hear, too. Life would be dandy!

Babadook783d ago (Edited 83d ago )


You don’t have cookie crumbs on Sonys face though. You’ve got the other guy saying he ate it.

None of your crack pot sleuthing adds up to evidence that out weighs that admission by the dev.

And again if Sony was guilty why not remove the more egregious skin suit outright?

CrimsonWing6983d ago (Edited 83d ago )


Guess we’ll just agree to disagree.

I honestly can’t see how anyone can look at this and say it’s not Sony when you’ve had Shift Up release games with uncensored designs in the past and was forced to censor designs in the exact same way. But crackpot theory here… 🙄

Then you have a corporation that’s the worst when it comes to censorship.

So, it’s really hard to ignore the connections, but you can think whatever you want and I’ll do the same. I mean at this point it’s like trying to explain the planet’s round to a flat Earther. It’s just one of those things where neither one can convince the other no matter how much you try to show the other.

Babadook783d ago (Edited 83d ago )

When were Shift up forced to censor their game? Is there proof they were forced in the past?

CrimsonWing6983d ago (Edited 83d ago )


I can’t tell if you’re trolling me or not.

Do you Google things?

Destiny Child:





Like, you’re messing with me, right? I mean, at this point I’m not sure if there’s anything further we can discuss except go down the Dumb and Dumber route of not being able to “Can too, double stamped it, no erasies!” bit. Give me a break here…

What’s next? A “Not uh” and “Yea huh” song and dance? You believe what you hear at face value. I wish I didn’t have common sense to put pieces together and be all gullible to take things at face value. If you look at all the outfits censored you’ll notice a pattern, it’s frontal breast covering. Look at a majority of the designs? Yea there’s a swim suit one, but the rest seem to hide shit with bows, netting, or whatever in a very specific area. Maybe there’s a quota? Who knows, when has censorship really made sense in these instances?

Remember Zelda Ocarina of Time censoring blood from red to green? Like, what’s the point—oh, you probably think that was the final vision, too. My bad, my crackpot theories here.

Babadook782d ago (Edited 82d ago )


Ok. I asked a pretty basic question. Had you had a good answer, I’d expect a clear, non rambling response. Nope. Nothing clear about it and you’re just kind of monologging again.

Where is the evidence that Nikke was not toned down by the studio? Where’s the evidence it was forced on them by another organization? They wanted the game to be under a 12+. There’s your answer. How is that being forced on them? They chose the demographic and could have gone 18+ if they wanted.

I hope you’re learning not to make outlandish claims. Yikes.

VariantAEC79d ago

It couldn't be clearer that you didn't play the game. There are outfits where EVE (who in the lore of the game is a CHILD, which she herself admits before the game's mid-point [in English and in 한국어; no typos or translation errors it's in both languages] ) wears much less than the Holiday Rabbit/Bunny suit. Literal bikinis are available in game and that is post what everyone here is calling "censorship."
This censorship crud is completely overblown. If you played the game looking for nothing more than T'n'A you really would not care about this 'issue' at all.

VariantAEC79d ago

"Freaking A, man. I can't fathom why it's so hard to understand for some people. It's duffel bag from Fallout 69 all over again, they advertise one thing and you're getting the other."
No, it really isn't.

+ Show (17) more repliesLast reply 79d ago
itsmebryan86d ago

Some guys can really be weird. They will get a refund on a game because they can't have a skimpy outfit on thei character in a game.?

The game must not be very good if the outfit is the deal breaker for the game. And before tou get on your high horse about freedom. Things change for many reasons in the final product.


DarXyde86d ago (Edited 86d ago )

The issue is it was said, by the developers, to launch uncensored.

Personally, I don't care if they censored it to get it out there.

But this is not a last minute, eleventh hour decision. Someone clearly knew this was coming. And I suppose in the literal sense, it's true that the game launched uncensored, but it also received a day one patch.

If we take for example Todd Howard saying you can fully explore every planet of Starfield and the game turned out amazing, guess what? If there are boundaries on the planet, they lied. People can still enjoy the game, but don't bloody lie about what it is when you KNOW this isn't what the consumer is going to get.

It's dishonest practice. The censorship does not detract from my enjoyment of the game. But I also don't appreciate being lied to. The Hard R thing made sense to patch out. Genuine mistake.

But when you campaign on your game being uncensored in its expression, you can't do this. It built hype and dropped the news on people's heads at launch. It's kind of like EA holding off on butchering UFC until like a month after reviews came in.

Not difficult to understand.

CobraKai86d ago

Not a big picture guy are ya.


Elda86d ago

Agreed. The game is so fun to play but these whiners are upset over one outfit that supposedly was changed. So be it, these whiners are missing out on playing a fun game.

InUrFoxHole85d ago

The game looks like trash to me so I won't be buying it but I think you are missing the point. Forget about how you feel about the outfits. The devs and sony put out a game then said... now that you purchased this game we are going to subtract from it. If you don't think that's wrong then you have to ask why are they issuing refunds for false advertisement? I'll help you out on this one... Because it's wrong. Now instead of treading lightly gamers should request refunds in mass. Vote with your wallet

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 85d ago
senorfartcushion85d ago

Virgins will virgin