INB4 a bunch of self entitled babies shit on Paolo Pedercini because they claim he's "only doing it for art, and it's not art" because the fail to understand the fundamental message.

Oh, wait...

@Paul_Tillich: Yes, I've always been a believer in philosophy, but always with a practical edge. High ideals are key to working toward what is best for society, but they must be grounded in the real world. There is plenty of law that is the antithesis of that, but largely I think the law is a positive tool for our society. We should all hope our lawmakers are guided by higher philosophies of truth and justice for the future, though I can't say I'm confident of that across the board.

Also, neuroscience and economics? Sounds fascinating.

@Jumanji: You have no imagination.

@Paul_Tillich said:

@autobzooty said:

Comparing Apple managing the content they distribute with living under a totalitarian government is pretty ridiculous. If you don't like it, don't distribute on their platform. Just because you want to develop for a platform that has a large audience doesn't mean Apple rules the world and needs to be rebelled against.

Would it be nice if Apple didn't censor the App Store? Yeah. Should you be angry or surprised when that doesn't happen? Dude...

We live in a digital age. Philosophers and theologians have been moving to social media to make their points about ethics etc. because books no longer reach an audience. Placing good business before a message about how people matter is pretty much a definition of a totalitarian government.

Apple isn't stopping him from saying what he wants to say. They're controlling the content that they distribute. Apple doesn't have a responsibility to give him a podium to stand on, and he doesn't have a right to use their distribution service for anything he wants. Apple gets to make those terms and exercise their own discretion.

If Apple was actively trying to stop his message from appearing in places outside of their own jurisdiction, you might have something a little closer to a totalitarian government. But even then, Apple isn't the government. The kind of self-victimizing and hyperbole he's exercising isn't exactly helping him out here.

It seems incredibly insensitive to the people who committed suicide and their families. Regardless of whether or not he is trying to spread a message. Added on-top of that it won't change anything, regardless of how many people listen or find out that it was banned from the appstore. It's significantly more insensitive than a game like Medal of Honor, because it deals with a very specific incident.

@autobzooty said:

@Paul_Tillich said:

@autobzooty said:

Comparing Apple managing the content they distribute with living under a totalitarian government is pretty ridiculous. If you don't like it, don't distribute on their platform. Just because you want to develop for a platform that has a large audience doesn't mean Apple rules the world and needs to be rebelled against.

Would it be nice if Apple didn't censor the App Store? Yeah. Should you be angry or surprised when that doesn't happen? Dude...

We live in a digital age. Philosophers and theologians have been moving to social media to make their points about ethics etc. because books no longer reach an audience. Placing good business before a message about how people matter is pretty much a definition of a totalitarian government.

Apple isn't stopping him from saying what he wants to say. They're controlling the content that they distribute. Apple doesn't have a responsibility to give him a podium to stand on, and he doesn't have a right to use their distribution service for anything he wants. Apple gets to make those terms and exercise their own discretion.

If Apple was actively trying to stop his message from appearing in places outside of their own jurisdiction, you might have something a little closer to a totalitarian government. But even then, Apple isn't the government. The kind of self-victimizing and hyperbole he's exercising isn't exactly helping him out here.

You are right. Apple has no responsibility. That is also my problem. Companies that act in their best interest without concern for future consequences is a reason to be concerned; lost in recent comments about legal rights is the fact that this game meant to make a point about what is best for our species. Apple has the right to stop the message, and I have the right to refuse that a true message be stopped.

Quick Look.

I'm sure people will probably think I'm kissing arse, but I can honestly say I would have lost interest in GB by now if it weren't for Patrick. Good stuff yet again.

Man... why not make this game as a criticism?

Congrats to whiteboyfro for managing censorship that gives his on the nose statement a million percent more attention than it would have gotten just being allowed to exist.

Can't ask for better press.

@afrofools: I think you're right. I don't understand why no-one else has pointed this out.

@Jumanji said:

@the_OFFICIAL_jAPanese_teaBAG said:

This game almost reminds me of that stupid game where you walk for 10 minutes and you have the choice to shoot a guy

Exactly. Another shit nongame that has the audacity to actually charge people money.

Im pretty sure Passage was/is free, at least on the PC/Mac it was.

edit: wrong game. sorry for my intrustion.

Now I want to play this game.

That is the most unsurprising piece of news i've heard in awhile.

Tommy Wiseau's latest work... "PHONE STORY"!!!

(Never coming to a theater near you due to depictions of child slavery/endangerment, suicide, and Apple's logo without Apple's permission)

Man, I really just don't know how to feel anymore. I already know about the horrible labor practices that go into making everything from electronics to clothes to food around the world. I know that my game consoles contain minerals that were mined in countries like the Congo and helped fund murdering guerrillas. That all sucks.

But then today, I went to an exhibit in NYC called Dialog in the Dark where you're lead through a fake city soundstage in total darkness by a real blind person equipped with nothing but a cane. You get on the subway, walk across traffic in Times Square and go shopping. He tells me how Apple has made his life so much easier with the barcode scanners in their devices that tell him everything he needs to know (cost, calories, brand) about everything in the store. Devices that only do that one function used to cost way more than a phone that also has voice GPS navigation that lets him map out his route through the city.

I hear stuff like that, and I realize how truly useful these devices can be to some people, even if all we see for the most part are people updating Twitter about what they're eating for lunch and playing time-wasting games. I guess this game isn't going to make anyone throw away their iPhone; even the guy who made it uses one. I'm a non-Apple user, so maybe I'll pick this up if only for the donation to charity it makes to stop these bad labor practices.

This story just reminds me of how fun it would be to work at Foxconn. No need to take the elevator or the stairs, I'm taking the suicide net.

"I own an iPhone"

Whoopsy-doodles. End article here. Enormous hypocrite detected.

The App Store is not a right. They invented it. Even if it is a right, ou already waived it by creating an account. And if you need an iOS game to tel you where your iOS device came from you are an idiot. You should have known about this before.

This is subject matter that might win awards in print media, I really appreciate tackling an issue that has some significance to it, there's none of the normal top 10 hottest babes sleaze that is associated with much of the gaming press, Bravo Mr Klepek and Giantbomb. Bravo

Sounds like a stupid, pretentious app about stuff we've heard a billion times before, and it sends a far greater message about apple through its rejection than its publication.

When you throw shit in the fan, expect to get some collateral spray. He should have known the content he produced would be banned. All he had to do was disguise the bad stuff enough so that it wasn't blatantly obvious.

All companies have a responsibility to be ethical. Apple doesn't want to be seen as condoning any form or violence towards children and they have every right to enforce that on THEIR hardware. If you use their platform, you are agreeing to their policies. If someone sued Apple for allowing this content, they would have no defence in court IMO.

Yeah this shit is real, and real people are being harmed in other countries, but it's not the companies that are the problem, it's the corrupt governments that turn a blind eye. It's great to focus people's attention towards this stuff, but eventually if there is no action against the governments (a la Libya, Egypt etc.), the problem simply comes back.

I think to blame the world's woes on Apple or any one company is unfair, I have had so many electronic devices that I have sent to the local recycling company, they do pay me loosely based on weight of stuff like old newspaper, old broken keyboards, mice, broken ceiling fans, broken scanners, a broken Pentium PC (this made me about US$2.3), fried motherboards, fried power supply, used batteries, you get the picture? We all have stuff, a lot of stuff.

However I still kept my first ever mobile phone, a very old Nokia, because it still works, but i'd be embarrassed to be seen with it, its not broken, but it is junk. Yeah I still use my second ever mobile phone, also a Nokia, its slow as ass, I hate it, but its all I need really, sigh #@$@&* phones.

There is no perfect world. The short solutions on Pedercini's website are nothing but naive suggestions, who will enforce them, which body? Who will pay for it ultimately? I think some of them have been suggested already elsewhere, the reason nobody does it is because everyone is a greedy corrupt ass or because these solutions don't work? At least our Xbox, PS3 and LCD TVs last 10 years am I right? But all those plastic the games come packaged with, blockbuster after blockbuster hits, oh my god, lets play them all with this baggage of planet killing guilt!

Best solution, don't buy shit you don't need. Maybe live in a cave, sell your car, better still lets all just fucking commit suicide so we consume nothing more. I'd like to sustain and improve our home planet, but come on, a game that criticizes its own distribution channel is really ironic in a jackassery sort of way. We know the planet is going to hell in a hand basket alright?!

I think it was I cool idea to be honest.

Missing the point if you think making it in flash and putting it up on the PC is good. The point of the content was to criticize (and possibly enlighten) the very people who are using the device. Another point is the market he feels that is being created by closed environments like apple. What if everyone had decided to do that? What if PC's or the web took that approach? We're lucky we have the web as such an open medium, but apple is the biggest company in the world and they have a lot of sway.

Besides even if apple was tiny and had no impact on the world why censor a political/educational game?

I bought the app for android. It kinda works - the response on the touch controls is not perfect, but it works.

It's a nice show and tell. Apple shouldn't have removed it, because it's all true.

Ugh....I don't care what the f*** Apple is doing. I'm here to read about video games and watch videos about video games. I'm not interested in time wasting, cheaply made garbage. If I was, I'd be wasting my life in Farmville right now

This is dumb. Sorry but guilting people into feeling bad over this stuff Is wrong it its own right. If we are going to start bitching about how smart phones are made lets just bust this wide open and admit that most consumer goods that aren't made domestically are probably made in sweatshop like conditions. I mean I feel bad for the people who end up in these factories making these things but I'm also not going to feel guilty for being a consumer.

@Demoskinos said:

This is dumb. Sorry but guilting people into feeling bad over this stuff Is wrong it its own right. If we are going to start bitching about how smart phones are made lets just bust this wide open and admit that most consumer goods that aren't made domestically are probably made in sweatshop like conditions. I mean I feel bad for the people who end up in these factories making these things but I'm also not going to feel guilty for being a consumer.

You have a responsibility as a consumer to not consume things that were made under immoral conditions. It's like how you'd have a responsibility not to accept hush money after witnessing a murder.

@Paul_Tillich said:

I was once proud to be part of the Giantbomb community...but at least people have shown their true colors now so I can be less engaged. I thought this place was above knee jerk-off comments one would find on IGN and Gamespot...

Nope, Giantbomb got popular after Gamespot and gamespy went to shit, so you get those users here too. At least they're articulate.

@rebgav said:

"A similar project that I was planning to distribute only to jailbroken devices," he said, "involved a dominatrix talking vagina the user was supposed to lick regularly (little known fact: touch screens work with your tongue) like a virtual pet for phone fetishists."

That is the new best thing on Giant Bomb.

Id buy it.

I dislike this game not from the message, content or graphics. The only games that should be on the app store that end in "story" are Kairosoft games. Kairosoft would have made a kick ass iphone story game, it would about brand marketing, proper management and score multipliers.

My feeling on the issue will be lost in the ether, and rightly so! I would never be able to make my point elegant like all of you.

But....I'll join the masses and say that this fell in a gray area where a person with common sense would say "Yeah, maybe it breaks some rules, but the overall message is positive. Pass." There aren't a lot of places for wiggle room when Apple says explicitly "This is the game we intend for you not to make. This is the kind of game we aren't willing to move the line on." In some ways, the smart phone has been an amazing way for people to communicate and share new ideas. But the truth is that there are a few companies that hold all the rules close, and they will not open it up for anyone, ever. The idea is wonderful, but the outlet might not be the best place.

Expecting someone to read through pages and pages of the rules that are now implemented from everyone is a consumer choice but totally unreasonable. Hopefully there will be places that the message can be heard. News stories like this shine a spotlight on a problem that consumers might be innocently ignorant to. I know when I was 6, or 12, or 18, I was unaware of individuals my age working under poor conditions to birth the devices I use to this day. The e-waste is excessive and depressing for many Eastern countries. Getting the message and awareness out there will always work when sites like Giantbomb are willing to inform their readers of it.

@BrockNRolla said:

@NoelVeiga said:

And that's why I present this as a moral issue, not a legal issue. If they had banned an aggregator of child porn... well, that software would probably be illegal anyway, but still, we wouldn't be discussing this. Because on the moral sphere, that ban is appropriate. Banning this software because it's bad PR for them in a platform that is a medium for creative expression for artists, though is bullshit. As in "it's a morally indefensible position by a corporate agent over an act of expression by an individual that they just happen to be able to legally curtail".

Also, and this may be getting a bit too technical for the venue, I suggest not mistaking the right for the articulation of it. Granted, there is an inherent value that is protected with property rights, which is ultimately what Apple is exercising here in regards to their app store, but when you see the app store as a public communications medium that is a majority controller of what ammounts to a duopoly over a mass communications medium, there are more relevant rights than property at stake, and free speech is one of them. There's a reason why many countries limit the amount of newspapers or TV networks a single corporation can own, and this kind of crap is it. Apple may not be in that much of a position of power yet, but them pulling this sort of thing suggests that if they were to be, they'd need to be limited in their ability to curate, as you put it, the content in their store.

BUT, that is why the law is important here. The App Store is not a public communications medium, it is a commercial property. While you may feel that there are more relevant rights than property here, the US court system does not agree. Property rights are some of the most enshrined and protected rights in this country, and the courts have repeatedly upheld a store's right to refuse to carry products. The only cases in which property rights have even been disputed in terms of freedom of expression have been when property owners have opened themselves up to free public use, such as denying someone the right to protest in the walkways of a privately owned mall. Given that Apple is the gatekeeper, the accepter, the reviewer, and seller of all products within the store, they haven't opened themselves to the public at all.

If that sounds dangerous, then that's a relavant opinion. But the law of the US doesn't currently say that freedom of expression can be allowed to override other basic rights like another's right to property.

See, that's where we don't agree. The app store is absolutely a public communications medium. It just happens to have been created by a private company.That's also true of the printing press, the television or the telephone, though, and nobody disputes their public communications status. Imagine if a phone company tried to prevent you from speaking about certain things over the phone because they "own the line". It IS true, but we have accepted that the medium is public, it's just the management of it that is private.

On the Internet, that realization is still not there, and it's even less so on the notion that these days digital stores are actually public communication channels. The app store isn't just a storefront, it's the platform through which artists reach out to people, the same way that CNN is a platform for jounalists and HBO a platform for artists. While I'm willing to accept that we must give those corporations a lot of leeway to decide what they want to air or not, there are limitations in place for them, and if a single corporation controlled a large portion of the available communications channels for news or for video-based fiction it would be both a competitive concern and a concern for free speech.

Apple might not be there to an extent where law needs to get in place to regulate their ability to manage their own storefront, but it's certainly close enough that I have a moral problem with them shooting down specific products based on PR concerns. I'm saying that this issue is certainly not within the confines of legal action, but it absolutely warrants people having a moral concern with it. And that's also their right. We may not be able to request Apple to not do this out of a legal issue with free speech, but it is certainly reasonable to consider it an immoral, shitty thing to do and call them out on it, even if they are legally entitled to do it.

@Deathpooky said:

@NoelVeiga: I don't really know what to say. If you think the only way you can make an impact is voting, then I disagree with you, especially if you think something like humanely raised meat is only a scam by corporations to get people to pay more. Change can happen from above, but it also can happen from below, and I'd argue a change from below is more effective and more comprehensive.

There might still be morally problematic products out there even if you refuse to buy them, but if you get enough people to buy morally clean products then there's that much less bad stuff out there. One person buying locally raised and non-factory meat or cage-free eggs has at least the impact of that one person buying it, even if there are 100 people buying McDonald's next door. The more people that buy the better product, the more companies will do it. Eventually if that's a market leading position, then everyone will do it, and we largely eliminate the problem. As I said, it's happened before without government intervention in numerous areas. If enough consumers request something, it gets fixed.

And I don't even get your Infiniti reference. Nobody is saying that you need to entirely devote your life to charity, donate every bit of money you make to saving lives, or refuse to buy anything that has any moral issues. But that's not a reason to never donate to charity or never consider what's behind the things you buy. Charity or thoughtful consumer purchases aren't all or nothing propositions.

" If you get enough people to buy morally clean products then there's that much less bad stuff out there" is exactly my point. The way to do that? Politics and legislation.

Just the economics of the situation mean that the premium-cost product is rarely going to make it not profitable to sell the cheaper, more profitable product that also requires these moral compromises. Economics are about buying cheap and selling expensive. Moral concerns suck and decreasing demand to the point where selling expensive is no longer possible. That's not a pattern of economy, that's embracing a wasteful option for the sake of human morality.

Making a compromise that is more expensive for the higher good is the realm of politics, not of economics.

Morally, and that's where Louie CK's my life is evil bit comes in, making marketplace choices because of moral reasons is always just a patch. If you avoid killing people with your car but still kill people with your phone or your TV or your sneakers, then you're not preventing morally compromised products, you're just creating a market for the Prius. If you want to stop the moral problem overall, you need to regulate it.

I'm not saying that buying products that don't engage in shady practices is a *bad* thing, but I'd like people to realize that it does more to make the customer feel good than it does to stop the problem. That requires larger sacrifices and paying much more attention to boring stuff like politics and economy, You don't get to save the world and go shopping at the same time. It takes more than that.

@jmrwacko: And as I said thats half the goddamn products we use on an average day.

It makes sense why Apple would ban this. But think about it: if it wasn't banned, then the only people who would know about it are people who already own iPhones and browse the app store. It wouldn't have stopped anyone from buying an iPhone because the customer base was exclusively people who owns iPhones. Now, he is going to potentially bring it to a different market, and it is getting infinitely more press than it would have.

@SSully said:

DOWN WITH THE SYSTEM!

But in all seriousness it makes sense why this was taken down. It doesnt matter how stylized the graphics are, it depicts people killing themselves, illegal child labor and the most obvious thing it does is openly insult the company who owns the device he is trying to put the game on.

With all that said do I support apples decision? No, I am all for open systems, but if I ran apples app store I personally wouldn't let this shit on there.

Also I would like to try this, but this guy has another thing coming if he thinks I am going to pay a dollar to experience this "game"

Oh yeah of course that makes sense. Just like Director of the iTunes being able to promote and sell his own, guideline breaking, fart app. The guidelines got changed when he caught selling just the kind of apps that he blocked other people from selling. I can't see why you wouldn't want to pay for this but you'd probably pay to watch something like Tropic Thunder. Both are parodies which aim to inform and offend using humour. You seem confused, you're all for Open Systems but you're happy that Apple is able to suppress the truth of their nefarious business practices and the income of creative people just so they can look good and yet continue to do nefarious shit.

@Vonocourt: Wow, I had no idea. Sounds like a nightmare.

I'm against banning, and against big companies, but I think this game developer has gone too far with Phone Story. Probably the whole reaction, including mine, is hypocritical, but it's not right to play with other people's tragedies.

I don't know why the community is so dismissive of this game because of the message it tries to convey. The message is not a nice thing, but its certainly true, and as usual, the world decides to turn a blind eye to the bad things and act like its all nice and rosy in the garden.

A lot of you say that its not the companies, but the countries...If the companies would stop funding the corrupt governments by paying a slight extra, there would be no problem.

@jmrwacko said:

@Demoskinos said:

This is dumb. Sorry but guilting people into feeling bad over this stuff Is wrong it its own right. If we are going to start bitching about how smart phones are made lets just bust this wide open and admit that most consumer goods that aren't made domestically are probably made in sweatshop like conditions. I mean I feel bad for the people who end up in these factories making these things but I'm also not going to feel guilty for being a consumer.

You have a responsibility as a consumer to not consume things that were made under immoral conditions. It's like how you'd have a responsibility not to accept hush money after witnessing a murder.

I agree, @jmrwacko. We can't just turn a blind eye to the effects of our actions because they are so prevalent. That "feeling bad" you spoke of, @Demoskinos, is your conscious telling you something is wrong. Do not ignore it because our culture approves of it.

Also, I think censorship is never acceptable, unless it is stopping the spread of hatred or bigotry. However, I feel like this App should have been free of charge, or its proceeds should all go to a charity promoting the issues that its creator has taken issue with. But perhaps I misunderstood and that actually is the case.

Thank you, Patrick. You continue to put Giant Bomb well above the rest!

@vinsanityv22 said:

Ugh....I don't care what the f*** Apple is doing. I'm here to read about video games and watch videos about video games. I'm not interested in time wasting, cheaply made garbage. If I was, I'd be wasting my life in Farmville right now

Well, you are a minority. One could say Giant Bomb is not for you.

Smashing article Kleppers (that's my new pet name for you) nailing it as usual.

@Warchief said:

add this to the list of reasons apple no longer used the tag line "Think Different" .

This just in, the new slongan is "Apple: You'll buy it anyway."

None of this comes as a surprise. All Apple ever had was a good ad campaign. I remember people soiling themselves back in 2006, waiting for Apple to talk about a video IPod. If they looked on the market they'd see that it's been done, but no that doesn't matter because APPLE hasn't graced us with it yet. Horse shit. People are such drones when it comes to apple products. Frankly, I've never seen such a product go through so many iterations in such a short amount of time, each with such minuscule differences.

As for all this people exploitation: welcome to capitalism; it is about the quick and easy buck. You don't like it? Tough, cause there's no way around it. Why is the US of A involved in the Mideast to everyone's disdain? Oil, it makes the world go round. This is no different.

@Discoman said:

None of this comes as a surprise. All Apple ever had was a good ad campaign. I remember people soiling themselves back in 2006, waiting for Apple to talk about a video IPod. If they looked on the market they'd see that it's been done, but no that doesn't matter because APPLE hasn't graced us with it yet. Horse shit. People are such drones when it comes to apple products. Frankly, I've never seen such a product go through so many iterations in such a short amount of time, each with such minuscule differences.

As for all this people exploitation: welcome to capitalism; it is about the quick and easy buck. You don't like it? Tough, cause there's no way around it. Why is the US of A involved in the Mideast to everyone's disdain? Oil, it makes the world go round. This is no different.

This isn't a place for your soapbox.

Found it funny that he makes it sound like only Apple products are guilty of these things but in reality all modern electronics have the same dark back story, only reason Apple was exposed was because A) its the hot new item and B) There are many Apple haters who will go out of the way to say that they are the main evil in the world.

If you do a game like this, show everything, show that PS3, 360, Wii, Android phone, flat panel tvs, dvds, blu-rays, even the computer he used to make this game all come from the Congo mines, the Chinese labor city factories, and in the end all of them get discarded to nasty places where people make hardly pennies to "recycle" the parts.

If you are going to make a protest, you go all out, you show everything or you just look like another "oh boo I hate [X] company cause they do bad things... dont look in my room for every other high end electronic product that goes through the same shit for their items!"

Dumb tablets? Luddites!

@AngryRedPlumber: See that's the thing I don't and refuse to feel bad over this. And if you do like I said by all means start chucking all your electronics out the window including whatever phone/computer you used to post on here.