Gun battle in Manchester cathedral

Watch this gun fight in Manchester cathedral, in a city where the clergy are among those battling an escalation of gun violence, then read on for the background. For the Dean's letter threatening legal action against Sony, see here.

This video game, developed by Insomniac, is set in a virtual representation of Manchester cathedral, where every autumn clergy hold a service for the families and friends of the victims of gun crime.

As we report, the Bishop of Manchester, Nigel McCulloch, is demanding that Sony withdraw the video game, Resistance: Fall of Man, because of a violent gun battle that takes place in the cathedral. 'Is this the first virtual desecration of a sacred building?' asked cathedral spokesman David Marshall.

The image of the cathedral presented in Sony’s game, a “first-person shooter” and launch title for the new Play Station 3, could not be more at odds with the its message of Christian peace and charity.
Weaponry used in the cathedral includes the Rossmore 236 close-quarter combat shotgun, the L23 Fareye sniper rifle and the XR-005 Hailstorm chaingun. The game has sold more than one million copies.
The game, in which World War II has never happened, is narrated by Rachel Parker, of British intelligence.
Ted Price, President of the developers Insomnic Games, has described the game as set in 1951 after a race called Chimera has emerged from Russia and swept across Asia and Europe, obliterating the local populace. The US sends an army to Britain to fight the invaders but all but US ranger Nathan Hale are wiped out. He joins the British resistance.

Besides Manchester cathedral, some of the game is set in 1950s York. Mr Price says the scenes were designed after an “environment artist” visited Britain wiht his camera. “That was important because we wanted to get it right,” he says.

During the game players are asked to assume the role of an army sergeant and win a battle. Screenshots of the game in play show the interior of the Cathedral with the player’s gun ready to fight. Soldiers can be seen elsewhere in the nave taking aim.

The Gamespot website reviewer Ricardo Torres has described it as part part Marvel Comics’ What If? and part Saving Private Ryan. On the Manchester shoot-out he says: “The first area we saw was a cathedral, where Hale and a small team were making their way to a rendezvous point to meet up with another team. We had just enough time to take in the surroundings and realize it was a prime locale for something horrible to happen when flocks of leapers - facehugger-like critters - came skittering down, looking for trouble. Thankfully, the cathedral had a fair amount of maneuvering room, so it was possible to put enough distance between Hale and the creatures to aim properly.”

Sony spokesman David Wilson told The Times: “It is game-created footage, it is not video or photography. It is entertainment, like Dr Who or any other science fiction, it is not based on reality at all. It is based on an alternative history. It is not realistic. Throughout the whole process we have sought permission where necessary. Our normal process is to seek all the necessary clearances.”

But clergy at Manchester cathedral said no clearance for the use of their nave for a gun battle had been sought or given.

Sub-dean and administrator, Canon Paul Denby, said: “I think they are going to be in for a surprise because we are not going to let this one go. You cannot use a cathedral in this way. One million people are visiting Manchester cathedral through this game. It is an abuse. “They ought to have sought permission. This is a place of peace, not war. This game must have been planned for months. It is abysmal to have this massive gun pointing down the nave of our cathedral. And it is our cathedral, there is no doubt about it. It is jolly rude of them not to have checked.”

Calling on Sony to withdraw the game, which has gone on sale worldwide, the Bishop of Manchester, the Right Rev Nigel McCulloch, said: “It is well known that Manchester has a gun crime problem.
“For a global manufacturer to re-create one of our great cathedrals with photo-realistic quality and then encourage people to have guns battles in the building is beyond belief and highly irresponsible.
“Here in Manchester we do all we can to support communities through our parish clergy, we know the reality of gun crime and the devastating effects it can have on the lives it is not a trivial matter.”

The Dean of Manchester, the Very Rev Rogers Govender, said: “We are shocked to see a place of learning, prayer and heritage being presented to the youth market as a location where guns can be fired. This is an important issue, for many young people these games offer a different sort of reality and seeing guns in Manchester Cathedral is not the sort of connection we want to make. Every year we invite hundreds of teenagers to come and see the Cathedral and it is a shame to have Sony undermining our work.”

All the clergy there are stunned and sickened. One told me that they are under no circumstances going to let this drop. I think Sony might be in for a bit of a shock here, if they thought they could simply trample all over the sensibilities of the Church of England and invent a gun battle with alien Chimera characters in a cathedral promoted around the world as a centre of peace and reconciliation. One million copies of the 18-plus game have already been sold worldwide and the technical reviews have generally been good.

The Manchester cathedral sequence is central to the game. Ted Price, President and CEO of Insomniac, has talked about sending an 'environment artist' to Britain with his camera to get accurate footage. The game went on sale in Europe in March, and in the rest of the world before that, and has been in development for months. But the Manchester clergy, not generally being game players, have only just discovered what it consists of. They are understandably appalled and extremely distressed.

When I phoned Sony to ask them about the claims of the Dean and Chapter that permission to use the images of their cathedral had been neither sought nor given, Sony insisted all the necessary permissions had been obtained. Sony spokesman David Wilson said he was not speaking as a lawyer but then added: 'I do not think it is common in the UK to have usage rights on historical landmark buildings.'

Cathedal clergy often say the public who complain about entry charges often do not understand that their buildings are not maintained by the Government, but this is the first time I have come across this attitude in quite such blatant form.

If it turns out to be the case, and I cannot believe administrator and sub-dean Canon Paul Denby would not know if permission had been sought or given, and they have no knowledge whatsoever that it has, it seems beyond astonishment that an organisation such as Sony could develop such an important, flagship game for its new PS3 without getting the legal rights necessary to use the image of Manchester cathedral. 'I would love to have seen what would have happened if they had gone to a mosque and done this,' Denby told me. 'It is easy to pick off a church. We are seen as a soft target.'

See more on this and other stories on our faith page. This is one video game that might yet be shot down in flames, by the peace-loving clergy of Manchester Cathedral.

Comments

[Tim]

Tom, I was confident that you would express a balanced view over this and I take your points about the non-inevitability of children maturing and then being unable to decide for themselves over faith. A more liberal attitude exists between western religions these days, than historically. Although, in Britain as recently, as the early to mid 20thC, church figures were accepted as both genuine and necessary. They were seen as unequivocal, along with religious definitions of behavioural and moral absolutes, or easy generalizations over what constituted good and evil.
I do nevertheless question the wisdom of steering children along a singular religious path, to the exclusion of all other points of view. My understanding is that even within provincial faith schools these days there is more of a multi-cultural perspective, but a Roman Catholic or Islam infused education is hardly likely to endorse another worldview as a credible alternative; it can only ever be seen in its 'otherness'; an entity wholly distinct from clearly preferred, institutionalized 'mainstream' values. I think that these issues take second place to the importance of emphasizing moral worth, mutuality and the basic integrity of humanity, which may coincide with some religious values, but which for me exist separately. I think that it is becoming apparent that religion costs more in human terms to deliver the message, because it is only based on the unshakeable theories inside the messenger's head.

This, I admit, is some way from the appalling effects of the morally-hostile video game, and since Manchester Cathedral is regarded as both a heritage site and a sacred building, it remains apparent that Sony have carelessly trampled over human sensibilities on several levels.

[Tom Jackson]

Tim, this is confusing because I do believe that as a parent, part of your responsibility is to provide a stable and consistent view of the world which includes - to some extent - a perspective of your own faith if you possess one.

I can appreciate this appears to have an element of coercion in that a young person is being guided in a particular direction. The degree to which this guidance is enforced varies of course. If you were born to a Muslim family in Iraq, there would be little choice in the matter.

As far as Western society is concerned - and the UK in particular - through the freedoms we provide as a community, there is the opportunity to explore many areas of life before choosing to either reject or accept a particular path. Where religion is concerned, is it really possible to influence a child's choice as they progress into intellectual adulthood?

The experience and information available to young adults these days is so far removed from that was available to me in my youth that we might as well have been reared in different parts of the Solar System. I have watched my three children grow up through since the mid 1970's and for much of that time, they were exposed to the developing Christian faith of both my wife and myself.

They are independent adults now and exercise a freedom of thought and belief that is free from any undue influence, from me, my wife, their schools or society at large. We have to give young people credit for having minds of their own and while there must undoubtedly be examples of some degree of indoctrination, these are going to be the exception, not the rule.

In a closed, confined and relatively simple community, such as was experienced by missionaries in Africa or in a cult such as that established by someone like David Koresh, there is an opportunity to influence susceptible minds but in countries like the UK today, it is unlikely. You cannot force Christianity down anyone's throat; it has to be accepted willingly, through a realisation of the presence of God.

Oh, and just for the record, my children are not practising Christians; they can see both the good and questionable aspects of my faith.

[enigma_foundry]

It’s even conceivable that the Church of England would use the law against blasphemy or desecration, which is, in fact still illegal in the U.K. The fact that apparently someone from Sony visited the Cathedral and took pictures while there recently may be important especially if a written picture (or photography) permit was required what the terms of that permit were.

However, it is very doubtful that the Church of England will, in fact, have to resort to legal filings to stop this game from using the depiction of Manchester Cathedral in the battle sequence. Simply put, there is a cultural dimension to any work of art/architecture, whose role extends beyond the legal constraints of copyrights and trademarks etc.
http://enigmafoundry.wordpress.com/2007/06/11/forgive-us-our-virtual-trespasses/

[Tim]

Tom, I am not suggesting that religion for itself necessarily adversely affects young people. I am simply questioning whether, in the context of issues that influence them, their parents' specific religious beliefs should be a part of their formative education. Your school, with its Christian influences, may not have produced fanatics or bishops, but it will certainly have been responsible for providing a partial view of religion, denying a pluralist overview. My point is that we should not internalize ideologies in order to accept or stabilize them as part of the imagined status quo.

If now, in order to pursue a wholly different set of criteria you were forced to participate in someone else's belief system, adhering incidentally to their very different values, no doubt you would resist. Does this not draw a distiction between personal choice during maturity and childhood, questioning how valid it is to set the latter within an insistent faith-based framework?

[Tom Jackson]

Tim and Heredal have both suggested that religion should be up there with influences that adversely affect our youngsters.

Many years ago when I was progressing though our educational system here in the UK, there were certainly Christian influences. When I was assigned to my "House" in the secondary modern school, I was given a King James Bible which eventually became one of my most treasured possessions - 30 years later!

I attended regular morning assembly where we sang hymns during a short service and RI (religious instruction) was scheduled for a period each week. My school did not produce any Bishops, clergymen or church officials from my year. There were no religious fanatics to my knowledge.

Of course, Christian influences produce their fair share of people whose interest and belief in Jesus Christ is shaped very early on. But, in my opinion, it is totally unsubstantiated to suggest that a level of indoctrination exists that has any noticeable impact on a significant number of youngsters.

Where other faiths are concerned, I just don't know. Islamic madrasah are an obvious example of teaching, the objective of which is to shape and confine a youngster's adherence to a belief system from an early age. And whereas a Catholic faith school might place more emphasis on religious instruction than a comparable Anglican faith school, my experience has been that the degree of instruction in such faith schools is very little different to that I received in a state school all those years ago.

I can understand that if you don't subscribe to a belief system such as Christianity, it is very easy to recognise religious influences in our community which I just don't acknowledge. However, the major guiding forces in our society - and the ones we should be worried about - are to do with personal power and wealth, not a belief in God.

[Tim]

Dire, negative, voyeuristic, mindless, pointlessly violent, unfettered capitalism triumphing over sanity, humility and humanity - all came to mind when I saw the footage of Sony's new video 'game'. There are clearly more people out there either bored stiff or with time on their hands than I thought possible. As Tom says, to question the freedom to sell this sort of drivel is not the prerogative of the religious. And whilst I agree with personal freedoms, and I'm not wholly sure just what effects these games, the internet and television really do have on children, in a world plagued with strife and violence, surely we can come up with something more edifying than this?

On the other hand, just how much noise has the Christian community been making about the wholsesale distribution of these violent coersive games, or the effects of the internet, or television, prior to Sony's invasion of Manchester? Presumably if the game was set in anywhere but a cathedral if would have passed by unchallenged, with the machinations of faith rumbling along as usual. But now there is something to pursue. A marked distinction has been drawn. The area of concern is not the appallingly negative content of the video, but how it is related to blasphemy or the autonomy of the church.

For me this particular game is intrusive and unnecessary, but since these type of influences have been mentioned in the context of their formative effects on young people, how do they differ in strength not genre from the way in which children from a very early age are defined educationally and influenced by their parents' religious beliefs?

[heredal]

"Anyone with concerns about the influence that television, video games, the internet etc. have on our youngsters is just demonstrating an intelligent awareness of how young minds develop and the need for some degree of control and selection when it comes to exposure to these influences."

Tom, given what you have said about some of the world's religions in previous posts on this blog, shouldn't you also include 'religion' along with tv, video games and the internet here? There is certainly enough evidence globally to suggest that we should all be concerned with what exposure to religious influence and indoctrination our youngsters have. Just a thought!

On the computer game in question, would it have been an issue at all in a fictional city and a fictional cathderal? I think Peter Bridgman has a valid point in his post. There were many who thought the Da Vinci Code was a desecration of the Christian message - look at the campaign that the Vatican orchestrated against it, for example - yet Lincoln and Winchester Cathedrals were more than happy to take money from Sony Pictures for the filming. It does seem slightly hypocritical now to complain about this game as a desecration.

[Chris Webb]

I know this is a very serious issue, and it does make me feel pretty queasy. But, to my mind, there was one bright ray of sunshine. When Sony depict a US Army Ranger roaring round the Cathedral with a Hailstorm chaingun (whatever that is) and blasting six bells out of some creepy alien spawn, the Cathedral staff respond with characteristic British fury: "Canon Paul Denby said ... 'It is jolly rude of them.'" Then, I hope, settled down with a nerve-restoring cup of tea to write a stiff letter saying, gosh, how really rotten it all was. Am I mocking? Actually, no. Admiring, in fact. I'll take the Canon's polite reserve and gentleness over Sony's disgusting bloodbath of violence any day of the week. Pip-pip!

[Neil]

Ruth, thanks for posting the YOUTUBE clip. As someone who himself might have a slight tendancy towards shoot 'em games if I had time and is not fickle and as someone who is Christian but who is not that bothered about "holy" buildings, this clip was shocking. It throws up all sorts of questions in my mind, too many to list, about what we are doing with this sort of "game". Would I react the same way if it were set in London Victoria station - I think I would. The fact that it's a real church, and not fictitous, makes it very sinister and brings all sorts of nagging fears of Dunblane and Columbine etc to the surface.

As to whether the Cathedral should have been consulted, OF COURSE they should. And I very much hope they would have thrown it out straight away.

The thing that totally swings it for me beyond any doubt is can we imagine what have already happened by now if Sony had done this to a Mosque?....

[A renegade priest]

I've got a brilliant idea for a new computer game, Lambeth08, set in Canterbury Cathedral. Basically civilistation has fallen in the wake of posmodern relativism, there is no law, and heavily armed gay bishops have to fight for their survival against hordes of undead, bible bashing, flesh eating conservatives from the Southern cone. Any backers?

[Tom Jackson]

I have to admit that even from a Christian standpoint, the main question here for me is not that this "game" has scenes of violent gun battles in Manchester or even that they take place in the Cathedral. Once you allow the development and sale of video games such as this, the location and scenario are the least of the problems.

As someone involved with the development of computer technology, I have to admit a certain amount of admiration when in 1993, a video game called Doom was released. The 3D graphics engine which gave the game such realism was a superb piece of software.

In retrospect, however, these technological advancements with personal computing hardware and graphics software have been hijacked by companies to stimulate a market which readily absorbs any opportunity to express violent and aggressive urges.

Now, this doesn't naturally lead to youngsters actually re-enacting their cyber fantasies in real life. My own son, who was in his mid-teens when Doom appeared, played his fair share of such games and there doesn't appear to have been any adverse effect. But it is difficult to believe there are not some youngsters out there who have not maintained sufficient control or whose realistic perspective has not been distorted by violent videos.

What these video games do indicate is a seeming acceptance that it is ok to put anything out into society without any regard for what the effect might be. And I have no doubt that many people agree with this.

I don't even think it is a Christian or religious characteristic to question this freedom. Anyone with concerns about the influence that television, video games, the internet etc. have on our youngsters is just demonstrating an intelligent awareness of how young minds develop and the need for some degree of control and selection when it comes to exposure to these influences.

No-one wants to live in a "nanny" state where experience is limited to a very narrow approved selection but most people would accept there should be boundaries and limits to what is acceptable and what is not. The question is, where do we set those boundaries?

[David Cohen]

If you want to complain in the UK it is remarkably difficult to obtain contact information for Sony. But their CEO here is Sir Howard Stringer, and the Sony press email address is scee_presscentre@scee.net

I am sure they take notice of a flood of complaints....

[David Cohen]

Perhaps it's a metaphor for the forthcoming Lambeth Conference?

[Peter Bridgman]

I expect the only reason the Cathedral is making a noise about this is because the Sony Corporation hasn't yet paid them anything.

Lincoln and Winchester Cathedrals were more than happy to take money from Sony Pictures for the filming of the Da Vinci Code.

And which Sony product does more damage to Christianity - Dan Brown's book or this silly computer game?

[Chris Gillibrand]

Arguing that Manchester Cathedral should be glad of the publicity, is rather like saying that Poland should have been glad of the publicity that Hitler gave it.

The Church attempting to "play the world's video games" is a good way to ensure that the young lapse,as the world does all these things so much better in the eyes of the young.

[Keith]

The great man Akio Morita once said. "Mottanai means irreverent, impious but more deeply it carries the connotation of a sacrilege against heaven." This game based in Manchester Cathedral is in Japanese language "Mottanai." I do not believe Akio would be happy to see this from the great company he once founded.

[Alex]

If it were a film or a TV program, they'd have had to ask permission first. Why not for a video game?

To Harry Neary, I can think of two very obvious reasons why they focused on the cathedral rather than the whole of Manchester. Firstly, it's their home; their lives revolve around it. But more importantly, they're considering legal action, and there they only have control over what happens to the Cathedral, not the rest of the city. I think the fact that they only spoke about the Cathedral is a sign that they've done their homework, and intend to take this all the way.

I'm a gamer and not religious at all. However, Sony are clearly in the wrong. You can't use a person in a game without asking first. You can't even use a car in a game without asking first (and usually paid a lot of money). You wouldn't be able to use the church in a film without asking first. So why think you can use it in a game? Especially for a gun-fight when they're trying to fight gun crime.

Sony say they asked all appropriate permissions. I'd be willing to be that the "conveniently forgot" the cathedral because they knew that the answer would be no.

[Matt Wardman]

Ruth

I've written an article looking at some of the legal points involved, and what is potentially at stake. Here:

http://www.mattwardman.com/blog/2007/06/09/video-game-battle-between-sony-and-church-of-england-the-legal-angle/

Also on my name.

On your last point Harry - don;t be so cynical. If they wanted to drum up trade, they would just have to keep quiet and let the visitors roll in. Or host a "laserquest" night.

Cheers. Matt

[Harry Neary]

Yes I'm sure this game will encourage people to fight alien invaders from another world in Manchester Cathedral. It's clearly pure evil.

/sarcasm off.

From the shrill responses here and those of Cathedral staff you'd have thought the game depicted Manchester Cathedral for some gangland violence involving drugs and prostitutes, instead it depicts an alien invasion of earth.

Of course the depiction of churches in warfare is common in all forms of art - from books, paintings, movies and the newer artform of interactive entertainment. This is because churches have always been part of warfare, they being the centrepiece and strongest point in a village/town.

Personally I'm rather sad at Manchester Cathedral's attitude here as a Mancunian, Christian and of course - gamer. Surely rather than condemning the game it would have been an excellent opportunity to discuss Manchester Cathedral on the world stage, using the church's inclusion in this science fiction game as a contact point with the young - who sadly are less interested in spiritual matters these days.

Instead the quotes I see in the papers give the impression of a church not being very well informed about this game or the culture surrounding it - and in effect will only serve to further alienate a young adult audience from the established church. I also wonder at the church's attitude in general - no criticism of seeing Manchester in ruins, just the Cathedral itself, as though it is separate from the city and the community. Perhaps these days this is the case, but it is sad to see this attitude.

The cynical might think it's just a way to drum up some more money through the Cathedral gift-shop cash register.

[Stephen Marsden]

A UK address:

Consumer Services
SCE UK
PO Box 2047
London
W1A 3DN

[Malcolm French+]

This is sick at so many levels. Not to mention the blatant "theft of brand" involved.

The appropriate response is to flood Sony, Sony UK, Sony Canada etc. with cards, letter, emails etc. decrying both the explicit blasphemy of using a sacred landmark as the setting for this twisted game, and the failure of Sony to follow basic legal procedures.

In my secular work, I have worked on contracts with theatre and film companies that want to use our companies uniforms, equipment etc. in their productions. They are assiduous in ensuring they have the proper permissions. For Sony to suggest that such permission is not required beggars belief.

For myself, I will write to Sony Canada to complain, and I will not purchase any Sony product until the company takes action to correct this sacrilege.

Sony Corporation
1-7-1 Konan, Minato-ku, Tokyo 108-0075, Japan

Corporate Social Responsibility Department
Sony Corporation
1-7-1 Konan Minato-ku,Tokyo 108-0075
TEL : +81-3-6748-2111

Sony of Canada Ltd.
115 Gordon Baker Road
Toronto, Ontario M2H 3R6
Main Telephone: (416) 499-1414
Main Fax: (416) 497-1774

I couldn't find contact information for Sony UK.

[emanuel appel]

a letter from America

Dear Ruth,

Granted, it's in bad taste but how much of Britain isn't?

There is something called "freedom" and religious places no longer qualify for "sanctuary" which was a Catholic invention anyway to battle medieval savagery.

The best way to fight this tasteless game is through economic pressure.