
The Last of Us Part II is First Naughty Dog Game to Feature Sexual Content and Nudity - News
by William D'Angelo , posted on 05 June 2020 / 3,747 ViewsThe official website for The Last of Us Part II has revealed the game has been rated M for Mature by the ESRB.
The M rating by the ESRB is not a surprise, however, the rating does list the game will feature Sexual Content and Nudity. Both are a first for a Naughty Dog game. Sexual Content is described by the ESRB as "non-explicit depictions of sexual behavior, possibly including partial nudity."
Here is an overview of the game:
Five years after their dangerous journey across the post-pandemic United States, Ellie and Joel have settled down in Jackson, Wyoming. Living amongst a thriving community of survivors has allowed them peace and stability, despite the constant threat of the infected and other, more desperate survivors.
When a violent event disrupts that peace, Ellie embarks on a relentless journey to carry out justice and find closure. As she hunts those responsible one by one, she is confronted with the devastating physical and emotional repercussions of her actions.
The Last of Us Part II will launch for the PlayStation 4 on May 29.
A life-long and avid gamer, William D'Angelo was first introduced to VGChartz in 2007. After years of supporting the site, he was brought on in 2010 as a junior analyst, working his way up to lead analyst in 2012. He has expanded his involvement in the gaming community by producing content on his own YouTube channel and Twitch channel dedicated to gaming Let's Plays and tutorials. You can contact the author at wdangelo@vgchartz.com or on Twitter @TrunksWD.
More Articles
Incoming lesbian sex scene.
No dildo required; Dina will just use her nose
-How do we balance the LGBTQ politics of this narrative? Lesbian sex scene? That should cover it. - On the other hand, it could possibly be a chick getting raped. Imagine if Dina get's raped instead of killed. Ellie just may snap and have to kill the mofo's who did it. This would be a politics double whammy though, so dunno how far ND would push that.
This will be the first time we've seen penetration in a console game since Custer's Revenge.
I don't really think sex scenes are needed for this game, well let's see how it blends with the plot.
Well well, knowing the stupid Australian censors, they’re going to ban this game. Movies gets the thumbs up and video games gets the thumbs down.
Na not for sex scenes. If it was drugs than consider it unavailable in Australia.
And yet Sony is censoring anime games without nudity. Funny that.
Oranges and apples
Basically the censorship is on material that could bet Sony in legal problems because it portrays characters that seem underage. But this must be like your 50th post complaining about Sony censoring titles that can bring they problems at the same time that it doesn't bring revenue.
@DonFerrari You mean games which are approved by both the ESRB, PEGI and CERO, which have released on other platforms uncensored?
Also I will continue to mock their censorship regardless how many posts you count.
"that can bring they problems at the same time that it doesn't bring revenue" - what type of reasoning is that? Niche games can be censored because they don't bring in money? So if a competitor to Mortal Kombat from an indie developer comes out Sony is free to censor it.
I won't keep this pointless debate because you have no interest in understanding it.
Fucks sake, all Sony’s stance is that anime-style games that feature nudity if characters who are clearly designed to look underage. Japan as a whole has been working on censoring that for some time. Anyone who complains is literally only upset that creepy ass lolicons can’t jerk off to cartoon children while playing games.
@DialgaMarine Nice way to demonise people with different opinions. If you must know I'm against any form of censorship, which you are currently defending for some bizarre reason.
Also none of the games that Sony censored feature nudity. Plus if we're going to go to the whole underage argument - remember when in The Last of Us there was an underage lesbian kiss? I guess that didn't count. Nor did the rape attempt again an underage girl from the very same game. I could also give you examples of games that featured actual nude underaged characters like Agony and Dante's Inferno, which were released on the PS4.
Then there's the point that Sony are the only one censoring those games unlike family friendly Nintendo.
@Zenos - I don't think Sony's concern of something like a lesbian kiss between teenagers. I think its more about going after what seems sexually gratuitous.
Sony might be over reacting at the moment, maybe they want to cater to feminist libtards. But at one time Nintendo censored the hell out of games and threw Sega under the bus. Historically Nintendo was much worse than what Sony is doing at the moment.
@Mr Puggsly The thing is who decides what "sexually gratuitous" is? To a puritan the underage lesbian kiss I mentioned could be considered that.
Every company has engaged in censorship at some point and Nintendo was very gung ho about altering their first party games for the Western market (and they are still doing that), but I care what's happening in the current generation. The problem is that Sony are going above the rating boards and actually forcing censorship and in some cases outright banning third party games like Omega Labyrinth Z, which hurts the Japanese developers and the western publishers who brought over these games.
I don't like any kind of censorship, but still there is a big difference between government (which basically prohibits all) and a company saying they won't do it, that is their right and you have a choice of not doing business with said company because of it.
"I don't like any kind of censorship" - sure you don't. This is why you come up with apologetics and are annoyed every time I bring it up.
"but still there is a big difference between government (which basically prohibits all) and a company saying they won't do it" - so the difference to you is who does it, huh? If a government implements the exact same censorship you'd be against it, but not when a company decides to act as a moral busybody. That's the definition of double standards.
"that is their right and you have a choice of not doing business with said company because of it" - we finally agree on something. Sony are free to have their censorship board and I'm free to completely boycott them because of it and ridicule them for that idiotic decision.
You show time and again incapacity to interpret and understand.
The fact that I don't like censorship doesn't impact my capacity to explain why it was done or how it differ, or capacity to be annoyed by you bringing it in almost any Sony related topic even when it isn't related at all.
Also there is a difference between a company using its own right to do something, like companies are free to sell what they want, they don't have to sell what they don't want. And you are free to decide if you like or not and if you'll buy or not. Against government you have no choice, they make it a rule and jail if you break. If you can't see the difference there is no point in explaining further. There is no double standard, even more because you haven't seem me saying I like the censorship Sony is doing, but keep fighting against windmills if you want.
You may boycott all you want, nobody cares.
"You show time and again incapacity to interpret and understand." - despite your condescension and personal attacks I perfectly understand your apologetics. When I bring up the valid problem and hypocrisy of Sony censoring sexual themes you try to minimise it by saying "it's different" or "at least it's not the government censoring stuff". The former is a deflection to avoid the point and the latter argument is completely unrelated to the situation using the zenith fallacy of "there are worse things in the world".
Your other line of reasoning is "they are a company, so they can do whatever they want". DUH! Any other obvious statements you'd like to point out? Of course they can do whatever they want, but that doesn't make them immune from criticism.
What else do you have? Ah, yes. Your subjective opinion of how related my posts are in a given article. How did you put it in the above post? "Nobody cares".
"There is no double standard" - yes there is. In your previous post you excused their censorship by saying that at least it's not government mandated one, implying that censorship is worth opposing only when the government does it. This of course is an absurd proposition, since what Sony are doing is just as wrong as what a supposed government censoring sexual themes would be.
"even more because you haven't seem me saying I like the censorship Sony is doing, but keep fighting against windmills if you want." - let's analyse this, shall we? So you don't like censorship, but rail against me every time I mentioned it. Those two don't add up.Even if you were neutral on the matter, which I sincerely doubt considering the effort you try to excuse the censorship, you'd just leave me be, but you feel the need to oppose me for some bizarre reason, perhaps platform loyalty. All in all you don't act like somebody who has a problem with censorship and especially with the "fighting against windmills" remark indicating that it's futile to oppose it.