OPM to remove dead goat pics

By GamesIndustry International Published 30 April, 2007

God of War II event controversy.

Future Publishing has confirmed to GamesIndustry.biz that images branded as "depraved" by the Mail on Sunday will be removed from 80,000 copies of the Official PlayStation Magazine.

The latest issue of Future's flagship games title contains images from a press event held for the release of God of War II, where a headless goat was on display to promote the 18-rated game.

Yesterday, the Mail on Sunday reported on the launch party, branding it "depraved".

Animal welfare activists were also offended by the use of a goat carcass to sell a videogame, with a spokesperson for The International Fund for Animal Welfare branding it "stupid and completely unjustified".

A spokesperson for Future confirmed that the publisher and Sony had together made the decision to address the issue after copies to subscribers were mailed out.

"It was a joint decision to remove the offending pages across the print run," said Future. "But the copies for subscribers have already been sent out so we can't recall them."

The spokesperson went on to confirm, "The decision was made to remove the pages in 80,000 copies of the magazine being prepared for the newstands."

Keep it GamesIndustry.biz for all things games industry. And all things goat, apparently.

Picture of GamesIndustry.

About GamesIndustry International

GamesIndustry International is the world's leading games industry website, incorporating GamesIndustry.biz and IndustryGamers.com.

Read more articles from GamesIndustry by visiting the GamesIndustry International archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (71) Latest comment 5 years ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • tonynibbles #1 5 years ago

    Ban this sick filth!

  • Steroyd #2 5 years ago

    LOL

  • FlamingCarrot #3 5 years ago

    Sony really should get a new marketing firm. Everything they touch is a polished turd.

  • BBIAJ #4 5 years ago

    Down with this sort of thing!

    Careful now!

  • Aretak #5 5 years ago

    Ban these crap official magazines!

  • playgen #6 5 years ago

    There were also women parading about with their tits out, which you can also clearly see in the magazine.
    Pretty daft thing to put in a mag young kids read, if your going to have a decadent party with boobs and corpses don't go telling everyone about it!

  • lasermink #7 5 years ago

    We can't have too much banning and cencorship. We must protect the Free World, after all, from filth and depravity, lest we succumb to anti-democratic tendencies, even if it means telling everyone what they can and cannot do. It is necessary. To remain free.

  • FlamingCarrot #8 5 years ago

    Its still an 18 cert game though, but this gives it far more publicity than a low rent promotion party with dead goat / small tits (well in the photo- ahem). The Daily Mail are wankers anyway.

  • numptyboymatt #9 5 years ago

    Well, to be fair, this is one of those occasions where any publicity is good publicity - the more people who are made aware of the game, the more copies it may sell, thus giving the developer more money to plough into a shiny new sequel for the shiny new ps3.

    I also second laserminks post - well said sir.
    Edited by numptyboymatt at 30/04/07 @ 11:16

  • Guff-Pipe #10 5 years ago

    Free publicity for the game and magazine! Bet Sony arnt that bothered.

  • HiddenAway #11 5 years ago

    Which page was it on? I got an early copy \o/ :p

  • Darren #12 5 years ago

    A headless goat in an advert is a bit too much though, isn't it? What does that have to do with the actual game... I'm 7 hours into it and I've yet to see any goats at all, even in the sacrificial context? :?

    I do wish advertisers would keep their ads relevent to the game... here I suspect it's been used to stir up controversy and that's the last thing anyone needs or wants even if it is an 18-rated game. These ads appear in magazines read by under 18s so it's hardly appropriate really.

  • ZuluHero #13 5 years ago

    boobies and goat offal - there's a site right there...

    Although i suspect there already is one :/
    Edited by ZuluHero at 30/04/07 @ 11:26

  • FlamingCarrot #14 5 years ago

    @Darren

    Agree totally.

  • sorenlorensen #15 5 years ago

    Pulling the entire print run of OPM?

    Can I ask for 2million copies (or whatever their circulations are) of the Mail/Mail on Sunday to be withdrawn from sale due to the relentless racism and misogyny contained therein?

  • FlamingCarrot #16 5 years ago

    Lets face it double standards are the Mails stock in trade, and numerous other rags i don't care to mention. Sonys PS3 ads are a disaster IMHO (if "this is living" then i'm undead) and far too clever for their own good. At least MS did intelligable advertising for the 360 i recall. There was the fake gunfight advert that whipped up the Mail readers though.

  • Dizzy #17 5 years ago

    Dead animals in press event == stupid moron PR people.

  • ZuluHero #18 5 years ago

    They say that the goat was killed in vain - but it does say in the article that they were encouraging guests to eat from it.

    Its not sony's fault that people don't eat goat like that. My mom always used to say its bad etiquette to refuse a guest's food... ;)

  • the_sas_man #19 5 years ago

    You all miss the point.

    Bad publicity = Good publicity

    GTA, Bully, Manhunt.... they all owe a lot of their success not just to being good games but also because of the PR machine surrounding their controversy.

    The guys knew a headless goat would cause a stir, whic it has, and now GoW gets free publicity in the press. People will know the brand far more before, and heck, some will even be curious by it all. Even more so when they see the game getting great reviews.

    Somone just earnt their salary!

  • SpacemanX #20 5 years ago

    Seems that it was one hell of a party! Shame that I wasn't invited...

  • bigbadbeasty #21 5 years ago

    I personally can't stand censorship, and I doubt many children read the Mail, if they do their parents should be reported to the NSPCC. If the game does have sacrificial content in it, then yes a goat or lamb is a common dipictation of what is used, so it should not be shocking if such an advertising camapign happens.

    I personally find the latest EVE Online banners more surprising, it has girls sucking off spaceships :p

  • X201 #22 5 years ago

    It's Crash and Unclear User all over again. :)

  • Scientist #23 5 years ago

    "A headless goat in an advert is a bit too much though, isn't it? What does that have to do with the actual game... I'm 7 hours into it and I've yet to see any goats at all, even in the sacrificial context? :?

    I do wish advertisers would keep their ads relevent to the game... here I suspect it's been used to stir up controversy and that's the last thing anyone needs or wants even if it is an 18-rated game. These ads appear in magazines read by under 18s so it's hardly appropriate really."

    Erm, it's not an advert. I do wish posters would keep their posts relevant to the article. ;-)

  • tonynibbles #24 5 years ago

    It's just a fucking goat.

  • GingerNathan #25 5 years ago

    You're all missing the point, the animal was killed for food and should never have had it's carcass used in such a way to promote a video game. It's in terrible taste, and Sony should sack whatever bright spark thought the idea was a good one. Yes most of us eat meat, but do we really have to treat life in such a disrespectful way?


    "People still eat goat like that and Monkey brain is still eaten from the skull"
    What has consumption of Goat meat have to do with using a goats beheaded carcass in a PR stunt?

    Edited by GingerNathan at 30/04/07 @ 11:45

  • ZuluHero #26 5 years ago

    @tonynibbles

    its true - its not like they killed a Giant Panda or anything. How many chickens, sheep and cows get wasted daily?
    Edited by ZuluHero at 30/04/07 @ 11:45

  • bigbadbeasty #27 5 years ago

    @tonynibbles

    You're right, we do eat lamb, and no one goes to prison :)
    Edited by bigbadbeasty at 30/04/07 @ 11:46

  • peterfll #28 5 years ago

    If the animal was killed purely for consumption fair enough. But it wasn't.

    I don't know many other multi-billion dollar industries that present decapitated animals at their launch events for big product releases.

    Way to go for Sony proving again to the ill-informed masses and bigoted Mail readers that the video game industry is immature and potentially harmful to kiddies.

  • SeesThroughAll #29 5 years ago

    Fucking get your act together, Sony. This irresponsibility must not happen again!
    Edited by SeesThroughAll at 30/04/07 @ 11:53

  • ZuluHero #30 5 years ago

    "If the animal was killed purely for consumption fair enough. But it wasn't. "

    ....but it does say in the article that they were encouraging guests to eat from it.

  • GingerNathan #31 5 years ago

    "....but it does say in the article that they were encouraging guests to eat from it. "

    They where eating warmed offal out of its stomach cavity, not quite the same thing.

  • ZuluHero #32 5 years ago

    I guess one country's delicacy is another's disgust...

    like haggis ;)

  • chupachups #33 5 years ago

    You wonder if this was deliberately controversial because they think anything controversial is seen as cool by their target audience.

    The trouble is, using a dead goat as a promotion for video games just seems bizarre.

    Sony seems to be going for broke with their controversy-hunting publicity, the full-length uncensored "this is living" advert shown in some European countries shows someone masturbating while playing a PS3 game. Again, that's not going to seem cool even if it is banned, it's just going to make PS3 owners literally look like a bunch of wankers.

  • DodgyPast #34 5 years ago

    I don't really get it.

    The goat probably died more humanely than the steak or chicken the writer eats.

    So which is worse?

  • Dark_Stranger #35 5 years ago

    @DodgyPast - Steaks dont die, but are a product created from the death of a cow :o)

  • malteaserhead #36 5 years ago

    DodgyPast
    30-Apr-07 12:09:55

    I don't really get it.

    The goat probably died more humanely than the steak or chicken the writer eats.

    So which is worse?
    ______________________________

    I don't get it either.
    Nor do I get meat eaters getting riled up about it :/

    Would it really matter if it was killed just to eat?

  • Mildew #37 5 years ago

    It's just plain weird - and to publish pictures of it is just plain bizarre - whoever markets thes things for Sony needs shooting, and then put on display for the God of War 3 party :o)

  • Weezer #38 5 years ago

    If people really gave as much as a slight shit, bullfighting would have ceased a decade ago. This is an entirely depraved, unfair, humiliating 'sport' in which a frightened sentient creature is taunted, tortured and eventually killed for the entertainment of the masses - yet it continues to this day, in the 21st century.

    Let's keep some fucking perspective...

  • GingerNathan #39 5 years ago

    "Nor do I get meat eaters getting riled up about it :/

    Would it really matter if it was killed just to eat? "

    So you really can't see the difference between killing an animal for food?, and killing an animal to promote a product?

    In which case I presume you also can't see the the wrong in beauty product testing on animals, using rhino horn for medicines, or killing an animal just for it's fur in order to make a coat. Hell I suppose you couldn't see the difference killing an animal for food and if the military tied live animals onto their tanks to use as bullet Shields! I mean we're only talking about animals here aren't we, why should we attach any value to their life! *That last sentence may include sarcasm!*

    We're carnivores (technically omnivores), we eat meat, but you don't see Lions killing for any other reason then to eat.




  • GingerNathan #40 5 years ago

    "Let's keep some fucking perspective... "

    You can't defend a hideous PR stunt by pointing out the wrongs of others, Bull Fighting does go on in Spain and Portugal, that doesn't make it right.

  • Daymare #41 5 years ago

    It's okay to kill and consume millions of animals every day but wrong to show a dead carcass in public!? Yeah, let's tell our kids salame is made out of Idon'tknowwhat and that all cows are blue and have Milka written all over them, just like in the commercials!
    Oh, in what a hypocrite society we live in... Only vegetarians should be allowed to condemn "this sick filth", thank you very much.

  • malteaserhead #42 5 years ago

    GingerNathan
    "So you really can't see the difference between killing an animal for food?, and killing an animal to promote a product? "

    _____________

    No I can't. Both are very trivial excuses as to why some other animal has lost its life.

    Carnivore smarnivore.

  • clockworkzombie #43 5 years ago

    http://www.threadless.com/product/490/Me...

  • sickpuppysoftware #44 5 years ago

    I'm confused, why pull it. It's not like anybody actually opens Official PlayStation Magazine. Unless they put the advert on the demo disc I don't see how anybody would notice.

  • malteaserhead #45 5 years ago

    Daymare
    30-Apr-07 12:40:36
    Oh, in what a hypocrite society we live in... Only vegetarians should be allowed to condemn "this sick filth", thank you very much.

    _________________

    I don't think anyone here said that.

  • GingerNathan #46 5 years ago

    "Oh, in what a hypocrite society we live in... Only vegetarians should be allowed to condemn "this sick filth", thank you very much.
    "

    So if I see someone beating a dog to death I shouldn't have an opinion on the matter because I eat meat, really.

    "It's okay to kill and consume millions of animals every day but wrong to show a dead carcass in public!?"
    I haven't got a problem with a carcass being shown in public, but using it to promote a video game (or any product for that matter) is tastless.

  • keyboardmonkey #47 5 years ago

    Surely the headline should have been Sony PR department kills their only scapegoat.

    @tonynibbles "It's just a fucking goat."

    That's a different magazine altogether. One which i believe a lot of Mail readers have subscriptions to.

  • Daymare #48 5 years ago

    "So if I see someone beating a dog to death I shouldn't have an opinion on the matter because I eat meat, really."

    Hm, in way, yes!, you'd be a hypocrite, having an opinion on that matter too!There's lots to be said about this, but I just can't be arsed about it right now;)

    "I haven't got a problem with a carcass being shown in public, but using it to promote a video game (or any product for that matter) is tastless."

    I don't find it any more tastless as buying a few pounds of meat at the butcher's every day without much thinking about where it came from. I understand that not many share the same sentiment on this matter, but that's how I feel about it. It's hypocritical, any way you turn it.
    Edited by Daymare at 30/04/07 @ 12:58

  • wibs #49 5 years ago

    I'm feeling hungry

  • GingerNathan #50 5 years ago

    "I don't find it any more tastless as buying a few pounds of meat at the butcher's every day without much thinking about where it came from. I understand that not many share the same sentiment on this matter, but that's how I feel about it. It's hypocritical, any way you turn it.
    "
    I actually do know where all of my meat comes from, any produce that I buy which which comes from animals I make sure they where looked after in the best way possible, before its slaughter. For example the chicken (and eggs) I buy come from completely free range corn feed chickens, and yes I know they are still killed for their meat, but at least they are well looked after and are happy (as happy as a chicken can be) before they are slaughtered. If we're going to eat meat, we should at least not be cruel to the animal we're going to eat.

  • skillian #51 5 years ago

    We're carnivores (technically omnivores), we eat meat, but you don't see Lions killing for any other reason then to eat.

    My cat kills for fun all the time - just bats the dead mouse around then leaves it on the doorstep. Anyway, we don't get our morals from animals.

    The stunt was maybe poor taste for some, but it's a launch party for an over-18 game so if anyone's being irresponsible it's the publishers who run pictures of the event, rather than those who conceived it.

  • Daymare #52 5 years ago

    @GingerNathan

    "If we're going to eat meat, we should at least not be cruel to the animal we're going to eat."

    I agree.. if, of course, you absolutely MUST eat meat ;)

  • muftak #53 5 years ago

    this is great marketing free press adverts for GoW2.

    if the animal in question was killed just for this then i would have a problem but seeing as it was bought from a butchers and the animal was going to be eaten anyway no problem with that.

    most animal right groups are morons anyhows like peta and the such
    Edited by muftak at 30/04/07 @ 13:23

  • chupachups #54 5 years ago

    "If people really gave as much as a slight shit, bullfighting would have ceased a decade ago. "

    Animal fights ARE illegal in Britain, which is where Future Publishing is based.

  • peterfll #55 5 years ago

    Christ, I'm glad I'm smart enough to know the difference between beating a dog to death and killing a cow (or goat) for meat to eat.

  • Daymare #56 5 years ago

    @peterfll

    "Christ, I'm glad I'm smart enough to know the difference between beating a dog to death and killing a cow (or goat) for meat to eat."

    But not smart enough to know that cows (or goats) don't get an injection for them to nicely fall asleep when "you" decide you want to eat it? My point being, both (beating a dog, killing a cow) is an act of cruelty and unjustified. No, you Don't beat a dog and no, in modern world, you dON't need to kill an animal because you Must eat meat. You eat meat 'cause you like it and because you like eating meat, you kill an animal (or worse, you pay somebody else to do it for you). How is that less cruel then beating a dog? It isn't, not to me atleast.
    Edited by Daymare at 30/04/07 @ 13:48

  • blicko #57 5 years ago

    "I personally can't stand censorship, and I doubt many children read the Mail, if they do their parents should be reported to the NSPCC."

    So you can't stand censorship, but you agree that parents should censor?

    "If the game does have sacrificial content in it, then yes a goat or lamb is a common dipictation of what is used, so it should not be shocking if such an advertising camapign happens. "

    I think this is as much about the nature of the publication (and the percentage of young readers) as it is about the ad itself - tasteless as it is. The ad would have been just fine in the latest edition of "Necro-Beastiality Monthly", but it isn't as appropriate for the OPSM (evidenced by the fact they're pulling it).

    Still, I have to agree with the cynics. I think this is far from a PR disaster for Sony.

  • peterfll #58 5 years ago

    @daymare

    I know how animals are reared and eventually slaughtered for meat. I know how the process works, ranging from battery to organic farming. I also think animal cruelty such as beating dogs or torturing animals for pleasure or spectical is different. And yes, I think that makes me smarter than people who think the two are the same thing.

  • Papalaz1 #59 5 years ago

    I think its fine to beat a dog to death provided you're prepared to eat the fooker afters.

  • Daymare #60 5 years ago

    @peterfll

    For your argument (that it's not the same) to be true, you'd have to justify killing an animal for food in this day, age and place ("modern world";). Since you probably can't, your argument doesn't hold water. If the reason is not the same, that doesn't mean the end result isn't.

  • the_sas_man #61 5 years ago

    No-one says anything about what the Welsh do.

  • peterfll #62 5 years ago

    If you think rearing animals for meat can also justify the torture of animals fine. I see a difference, and thankfully so do may others, including the law of this country.

  • the_sas_man #63 5 years ago

    How about this for opening a whole big fucking can of worms:

    Would the media say much about the event if there were many Muslims? Sacrficing goats is normal to please their god!

    Hence probably why there is some connotation: God of War? Muslim vs West?

    hmmmmm

  • Daymare #64 5 years ago

    @peterfll

    Who said anything about justifying torturing of animals? Not me. That is what you're indirectly doing with your eating (and dressing) habits. Just because you like dogs more then cows, pigs, goats and chickens, that doesn't mean killing an animal for food in the world of supermarkets is any less wrong then beating a dog to death. Latter is sickness of one person, former a sickness of modern society that made an industry out of killing.
    Edited by Daymare at 30/04/07 @ 15:12

  • GingerNathan #65 5 years ago

    Daymare get of your high horse, the way animals are killed in most abattoirs (I'm not going to try and speak for all of them) is humane (just because you don't agree with killing animals for meat, doesn't make it any less humane). Beating a dog to death is a cruel way of killing it and you can't be so ignorant not to be able to see that there is a clear difference. If we take your stance on life then just about everything we do kills or participates in the killing of something, so you can stop using modes of motor transport or any kind of electric usage - in fact quick get off your PC, the carbon emissions are polluting and killing life as we speak!!

    As far as being selective on what we kill (although when we're talking about an animal that wouldn't exist if it wasn't for Man's desire to eat meat then there's an argument - the individual animal that is and not the species) I certainly hope you don't squash any flies or spiders, as that would make you a hypocrite!
    Edited by GingerNathan at 30/04/07 @ 15:41

  • Daymare #66 5 years ago

    "Am i understanding this - by eating meat i am indirectly mistreating animals."

    Yes, you bloody idiot! (that's for the "retard" comment)

    You believe what you want to believe and so do I. The difference is, I don't base my believes on my tastes, like you do. I liked meat too and I still crave for it sometimes, but that doesn't mean I'm gonna eat it. I wonder if you can do that, bito?

    Just because you like eating meat, that doesn't mean it's right thing to do, and certanly not a must - note a whole bunch of living vegies in this world. You nod to what doctors are saying because you like Big Macs and that's that. Every excuse is good for you.

    You're talking something about a majority of this world that "knows better".. Well that kind of argument can only come from a person, who goes where the crowd goes. Sheep mentality.

    Just because we had to kill animals when we were living in caves that doesn't mean we still need to do it now. Another stupid argument, really. I go to a store and can buy myself all sorts of food. If you can't do that and you're still living in the woods or something, then be my guest, kill a deer it would be justified.

    It's your free choice to eat meat, I know and understand, just don't come here and try to justify it with your hald-baked ideas..

    You know, children are reading this;)

  • Daymare #67 5 years ago

    @GingerNathan

    All good points and I agree on most of them (except the difference between killing animals and reasons for that, my stance on that still stands of course), but I was not the one "complaining" over the immorality of having a dead goat at a PR party. That is why I got into this "argument" in the first place. I'm not saying I'm perfect, hell no. I've killed my share of bugs:)

  • Daymare #68 5 years ago

    bigi

    If you're a carnivore, why do you have to act like a donkey?;)

    At least we agree on something: some of the crap written here is absolutely ridiculous.

    We're not taking care of the circle of life (more like messing with it), we're breeding animals and we kill them and we eat them, all in quantities that are totally unjustifiable. Solution for overcrowding!? Ain't the cows that are overcrowding this planet, mate, if you haven't noticed..




    Edited by Daymare at 30/04/07 @ 16:31

  • Daymare #69 5 years ago


    ;)

    You will never respect my views and vica versa, but we can try to understand each other, tha's all:)

  • Redeye #70 5 years ago

    I feel compelled to say at this point, that the whole thing would have been far more entertaining if they'd replaced the goat with Phil Harrison.

    Heck, I might have even bought the mag as a result.

  • Nithron #71 5 years ago

    You know what this means don't you?

    In ten years time people will be paying £200 for a copy of the "infamous dead goat edition of OPM RARE!!1!11" on Ebay

    Which due to the constant buying out and merging that takes place these days will probably be called SonyGoogleSoftBay

    Probably.