Gilan wrote:
>With these new implementations the South China Morning Post notes that violent titles which allow players to be good or bad wouldn't be seen favorably.
>"Some games have blurred moral boundaries. Players can choose to be either good or evil … but we don't think that games should give players this choice … and this must be altered," said the memo.
Why is it that authoritarian regimes always has these little euphemisms? "It must be altered, needs must be accommodated, disruptive elements have been … removed".
RIP Chinese Game developers, for a while it seemed like they were developing into their own and actually becoming a force in their own right. More broadly, RIP most of China's cultural output, they've cracked down on films, books, series and now it's new media and games.
From what I've seen it's a trademark of specifically post-revolutionary authoritarian regimes that use that kind of "revolutionary language". It's to separate themselves from the excess state violence that the previous regime. Doing exactly the same thing but framing it in revolutionary rhetoric it makes it far more palatable to the masses that support the regime.