Gamespot’s Feedbackula gave me pause for this issue. It seems that when you have a PlayStation 3 debugging console, it will be possible to see Ellen Page ‘fully’ naked in a shower scene. Now, this was a little issue, because when I played the game the clock in the kitchen stated 7:49, which meant that pizza and the CIA buddy would arrive in roughly 660 seconds. The buddy might arrive late, but the pizza delivery guy is not likely to be late, hence, no shower. I saw the shower footage and under normal conditions you see nothing revealing. Which seemed to be different from Heavy Rain (a game I did not play) there is complete nudity, like a decent quality movie, when she takes of her panties, Madison’s view on her thighs are ‘blocked’ by a washbasin between her and the camera. So, basically we saw nothing ‘too’ revealing. With Beyond two souls it is a different thing. Here we saw in the making, that Ellen and her co-workers were all in tight fitting black overalls with grey balls all over their bodies (like bad 21st century polka dot fashion), which means that the body they used was not Ellen (so I guess), so why is this likely to hit her career? Willem Dafoe was naked in ‘Body of Evidence’; his career did not take a hit, did it? In case female gamers are into seeing a little more of Eric Winters, which made Katherine Heigl go ‘Oh my!‘ then check out ‘the Ugly truth’, for extra giggles check out the ‘outtakes’ on the DVD.
So why this hypocrisy, more important, how was this not avoided? I think that the breasts might not have been a big issue; here in Australia we see tens of thousands of them on the beach (usually in sets of two). What is likely the bigger issue is the noisy mess Sony is making out of it all! The latest (which is a few days old), is that “Actress Ellen Page is reportedly considering a lawsuit against Sony, it was revealed yesterday“, this news showed up on more than one location, so I do not know where this is at. What is important is that this is the same glitch Heavy Rain had and as such I do not know what that status is. That nude scene was on several sites. I do not know whether this had been Madison’s actual body (played by Jacqui Ainsley), if so then we can only envy Guy Ritchie. Likely that the nude body of Jacqui Ainsley was also based on someone else, but I could not tell in either case if this was the case (just logical assumption on my part).
Should Ellen Page go to court, then she would end up with a strong case. The Heavy Rain issue was from 2010; the fact that this issues surfaces again three years later, means that either Sony or the developer was unable or unwilling to learn from past mistakes. Those possibilities tend to get expensive once proven. Jacqui Ainsley was a model in numerous glossies; Ellen Page is an award winning actress, winning an Academy Award and a Golden Globe. If she can show that this event is hurting her career, then it would be fun to read in Forbes in 2014, that a Canadian from Nova Scotia became the CEO of Sony, a company that is one of the pillars of the Japanese Economy, (an unlikely, but entertaining scenario). I got the image from http://www.allgamesbeta.com/2013/10/uncensored-pictures-of-ellen-page-from.html (it is one of several sites).

I am adding a censored frontal shot, so that people can see how far this scene was taken onto the disc (even though nothing was ever shown in the actual game). It does not matter whether it was playful banter, or just a little piece of candy for the male gamers (remember that only development test consoles allowed for changing the camera angles), so why was it all taken this far for a scene that was not needed for the game or the storyline?
I initially thought that this would mean that this would add up to good times for Ellen Page. The issue is that when it comes to virtual nudity not much exists. There is an interesting paper called ‘A Passive Approach to Regulation of Virtual Worlds’ by Jacob Rogers that made it to the ‘The George Washington Law Review’. It was published in 2008 Vol. 76. (Pages 405-425). In this paper Jacob observes that there is a lot of legislation missing involving virtual events. However, Ellen is not without due defence. As Jacob quotes Professor Jack Balkin “someone might bring claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress.” Which came from “Jack M. Balkin, ‘Virtual Liberty: Freedom to Design and Freedom to Play in Virtual Worlds’,2004”. So there is precedence for this, which takes us to the world of Torts. Sony might claim that there was no intent, yet the issue three years earlier (also with a Sony game) had not been dealt with, which takes us to the world of Torts. We have Foreseeability of damage, the Wagon Mound 1 case [1961] could apply. If we consider (there are statistics), that the average gamer is a horny little rascal, then we could foresee that they would check the heavy rain option the moment a shower scene came up, if we accept (consider) that the shower scene had no bearing on the story, then we can consider two sides. First in the regard that the scene could have been replaced by a gun cleaning scene (she fires a few during the game), A hand wash laundry scene (in case the steam on the mirror was essential) or a dressing scene in front of a mirror. In the second it would have been an option to make the shower scene a non-interfering cut scene (a movie cut, not a location cut). All these options! As we are in torts, the negligent act causing economic loss is a situation that is covered in every common law nation, yes also in Japan.
So we can safely say that should Miss Page take this to the next level, Sony might be wise to give her a residency tower (to get some landlord income on the side), a small percentage in Sony Interactive Entertainment and at least 5 roles at twice her last pay to settle this issue (not a bad day for a short youthful Halifax Canadian). It is not realistic, but we can hope for her!