[PS4] Free - Black Lives Matter Theme @ PlayStation Store

Moved to Forum: Original Link

Give your PlayStation®4 system’s home screen a personal touch with this special theme in show of support for the Black Lives Matter Movement.

Themes can be downloaded to give your on-screen display a completely new look, changing the background, icons and colours to match your favourite game or style.

After downloading, you can select the theme you want to use via the Themes option on the PS4™ system’s Settings menu.

Download of this product is subject to the PlayStation Network Terms of Service and our Software Usage Terms plus any specific additional conditions applying to this product. If you do not wish to accept these terms, do not download this product. See Terms of Service for more important information.

One-time licence fee to download to multiple PS4 systems. Sign in to PlayStation Network is not required to use this on your primary PS4, but is required for use on other PS4 systems.


Deal Posting Guidelines: Free Multimedia & Content:

There are so many useful free multimedia content (e.g. ebooks, videos, photos, software, apps etc.) and websites out there that if we listed every great one, then we would be inundated with deals. Feel free to discuss any of these in one of our forums. Alternatively, add the freeware to its dedicated free software wiki page – Useful Free Software.

In general, multimedia content that are always free and available to everyone should be posted in the forums, but if something that was not previously free is offered free temporarily or permanently, it qualifies as a deal. In some cases, decisions on whether a post should stay as a deal or be moved to a forum post is at moderators discretion.

Related Stores



  • +13

    BLM must be one of the worst movements on Earth from the way people in the comments describe it. They're "marxist, racist, anti-semitic, terrorists".

    Golly. I feel like I've stepped into a Fox News comment section.

    • +3

      Yeah for some reason the same people who advise to "wake up sheeple" tend to defer to politicians for advice on what their viewpoint should be.

    • -1

      Almost the entire MSM is politically left and your take is "yeah but there's still one place that isn't".

      How big do you want your echo chamber?

      • +2

        My take was it is interesting to see propaganda and right-wing rhetoric filter down into the rest of society. As I'm an avid consumer of American news (of all leanings) it is funny to me to see, for example, Rudy Giuliani say something and then hear that same talking point repeated back to me a few weeks later by a friend.

        As for the leftist MSM… lol. Do you mean The Guardian? I can't think who else you could be referring to. Certainly not Ch7, Ch9, Ch10, or Sky News.

        • +1

          These people don't even realise they are the ones in the echo chamber with their news consumption and right wing social media groups and lame memes. It's bloody hilarious.

        • +1

          BLM and Fox News….so clearly the discussion was about US news (CNN, MSNBC, WaPo, NYT).

          However, you can merge all the above mentioned Aussie media and they are nothing compared to the cultural influence and power exerted by left and some hard-left media organisations with global reach:
          - GOOGLE
          - Twitter
          - Facebook
          - Youtube
          - Hollywood and most celebrities and sports-stars

          • +2

            @aml123: Ah yes, conglomerates and corporations, truly famous for their Marxist leanings

            • +2

              @DarkWorld: fickle stance to appease rather than principled?

              • @yannyrjl: Appease to what, calling for them to be disbanded?

                • +2

                  @DarkWorld: corporates trying to appease the mob to avoid backlash, do you seriously not understand?

                  • @yannyrjl: No, because if the mobs were Marxist they wouldve started a revolution already, not months of protests with little to show for it

                    • @DarkWorld: they did, didn't they CHAZ / CHOP killing in the process

                      • @yannyrjl: CHAZ was the LARP of the decade. On too of that they somehow introduced segregation back in which is just hilarious.

                        • @DarkWorld: hey, I don't tell them what to do, I just see the hypocrisy and it wasn't the conservatives doing this

                          Not saying the Marxists are smart, otherwise they would understand economics

                          • +1

                            @yannyrjl: Oh yeah, conservatives, bastions of economic soundness compared to “the left”

                            Republicans going for trickle down economics (again) and removing regulations that were introduced to prevent another GFC, and heading towards a $2trillion debt with little regard to attempting to balance the budget - just more tax cuts to the rich.

                            And the Libs, handing out tax cuts (admittedly a little more broadly) whilst delivering our biggest deficit ever. Good to see Libs actually needing to manage poor market conditions for a change. Strange though, didn’t hear much outcry in the media about budget deficits compared to when Labor has been forced to do it. Funny that. Must be that left MSM again.

                            • +1

                              @Randolph Duke: I would appreciate a somewhat less sarcastic tone and we can have a fruitful discussion.

                              Let's look at this rationally, you mentioned trickle down economics in a tone that suggest you don't believe it's efficacy, can you layout how trickle up would work better? I really can't see the case for it as trickle up economics doesn't encourage major investments.

                              You would appreciate, with current day social programs, a large portion are net receivers (unfortunately I don't have the stats). I'm curious when you say tax cuts for the rich, whom do you mean in terms of income?

                              While I'm fiscally conservative, on the current situation in Aust (March 2020), I really can't see a very strong case against Job Keep when it was first introduced. I see it as rushed and some of it was not so well planned (I've personally seen many people were "better off" rather than "made good", and seen some negative consequences of this, I've also seen businesses abuse this and making good profits as a result). However, I do appreciate during that time centrelink was in no position to accommodate the huge numbers.

                              When Labour done the pink bates it was heavily abused and leading to correlated death. For job-keeper, it did provide the social assurance to a certain extent to avoid social unrest. Expensive, definitely, did it achieve it's primary goal, I'd say yes, and that's already better than many government programs.

                        • @DarkWorld: wasn't the CHOP described as "Summer of Love" or "Giant Block Party" by Mayor Durkan

      • +2

        Newscorp is the biggest news company in the world, and dominates circulation & number of papers in Australia.

        You do really have to be special snowflake to believe the majority of media is politically left, particularly in Oz.

        • +1

          by number of sources I'd say yes very much left leaning, by viewership or distribution a bit closer

          However, when people check "Multiple sources" better idea to check opposing sources.

          • +1

            @yannyrjl: List who you think is “very much left leaning”

            • @Randolph Duke: https://www.adfontesmedia.com/interactive-media-bias-chart-2...

              You can count how many on the left vs right and how many names you recognise on either side

              I would even argue where the centre is drawn is somewhat subjective, but just a source other than me

              • +1

                @yannyrjl: We must have a different definition of “very much”

                What should be more concerning to you is the traditional stalwarts who are just left of centre, vs the big names on the right are who approaching the fringes of extreme right. Night and day difference in bias.

                • @Randolph Duke: if you read the way I use the word very much left leaning, the subject is number of sources

                  perhaps you interpret it was I'm saying left leaning sources are far left which was not the way it's written

                  hope by the source I provided you can see the number of left leaning sources is indeed substantially larger than right leaning and find some agreement here

                  • @yannyrjl: I will agree with that, but circulation numbers are important too - as I said initially, News has far more circulation and reach in Oz then say Fairfax.

                    • @Randolph Duke: glad to see agreement, I can see your someone who's willing to converse

                      Circulation is indeed important, I focus a bit more on the US as the market is much bigger and the number of sources greater as well, which can provide more justification to my claim. After all the topic is on BLM so discussing US is appropriate

                      Australia is some what less clear in my mind, I haven't paid close attention with circulation numbers or viewership. Also, don't forget there are substantial international presence in Oz as well. I think the number of sources argument remains valid. I see a substantial readership of the guardian, huffpost and buzzfeed but honestly have not numbers

                      To me I find it more interesting considering why people are drawn to certain views vs others, to claim racism, lack of intelligence or some other blanket attribute is intellectually lazy.

                      For people who are interested in these topics, find some intelligent friends / acquaintances who's on the other side (we can see there's a lot even on these forums). There are a few guys I discuss politics with closely, a lot of disagreements, long arguments, but always discussed with good intent. It really broadens your knowledge and gain new insights. So much so that you start seeing how some public speakers are very poorly informed (on both sides) and can't refute very basic opposition.

                      An interest note, out of the 4 of us who discuss closely, the two left leaning guys are white guys (one Australian, and one British and grew up in South Africa), the two right leaning (myself Chinese and an Egyptian recent migrant), provides a slight counter to the whole narrative around conservatives are old white guys.

                      While no one on these forum call me a racist / nazi directly as I try to remain courteous. I did see posts that say everyone who voted -ve must be all white and never experienced racism. One even suggested this was somehow a coordinate effort, these claims just doesn't add to the conversation.

  • +9

    End result:

    • 188+
    • 112-
    • 17 Reports

    What a beatiful shitshow, I haven't been entertained like this for a very long time. Thanks everyone!

    • +4

      TLDR: Not a deal, belongs to a forum.

      Winner: Whoever with popcorn in their hands.

    • I bet OP didn't expect this, now has his world view broaden somewhat

      • +4

        I would be astonished if this orchestrated abuse wasn't planned.

        • I don't believe so, as I certainly didn't talk to anyone else, and I've accounted for significant number of posts.

          Also, why do you "orchestrated abuse"? I see several - voters getting called personally insults that the caller has no way of justifying in person. I did see some + voters had their intelligence question, but compared to the insults the other way, I see it as rather tamed

          • +1

            @yannyrjl: yeah right

            • @petry: no argument to back up your claim? so deflecting?

              • @yannyrjl: deflecting what - your opinion? - which counts for what exactly? More than mine apparently from your personal accusation……

                • @petry: you clearly haven't followed the dialogue closely enough. You made a claim that you "would be astonished if this orchestrated abuse wasn't planned."

                  I raised the counter example that certainly in my case I haven't had any orchestration with anyone else on these forums.

                  The usual course of a rational discussion is to either:
                  1. be astonished as you have stated
                  2. address my counter claim, with further evidence

                  You've done neither but simply ignore the counter evidence rather than providing any further rational evidence, hence my pointing out your deflecting. Then you go off one a complete tangent saying I believe my opinion is worth more than yours, which it self is another avoidance technique.

                  • @yannyrjl: If you wanna make up your own rules to justify your personal opinion feel free - this site will let you!

                    As for being rational - not a lot of that left anywhere which is why I stick to facts.

                    Maybe you should try that

                    • @petry: so the fact that I wasn't part of this "orchestrated abuse" you have claimed is ignored?

                      • @yannyrjl: really?

                        • @petry: indeed, the normal reaction as I pointed out is take the new evidence into consideration and reevaluate

                          you can continue making your claim, but with the caveat to exclude myself as I can only speak for my non-involvement of this orchestration if it does indeed exist.

                    • @petry: based on the notion of "this site will let you", does this mean when you engage in discussions elsewhere, you require site moderator's assistance?

                      • @yannyrjl: you haven't provided any evidence

                        • @petry: I would know if I was such part of an orchestration, I don't know you and vice versa. If you come from a place of neutral stance is my confirmation of my non-involvement insufficient for such triffle matter?

                          Do you believe people are guilty until proven innocent, almost akin to so Salem witch trials.

                          What evidence do you have that I was part of an orchestration? For integrity and consistency I would suggest you apply your standards first and foremost to yourself

                        • @petry: petry, to be perfectly honest with you, I have nothing against you, I find it somewhat amusing when people (in general, as there are others on these forums) make very absolute claims that only require a very low bar to refute (to the by-stander). I commend you at least engaging and being reasonably courteous

                          Just pull back a little and consider the counter arguments, and then rephrase to make the statements more robust

                          If you consider this rationally, your claim could easily be made by the opposing side as well, "it's an orchestrated push for BLM to try to influence and politicise Ozbargain.", and when you say it's not, I request you to provide evidence. It's just not how a free society organises itself as it would likely lead to conflict with the majority side usually "winning" (when obviously we know it would end in loss of ideas and debates in the long term)

                          • -1

                            @yannyrjl: your opinion - and its not a free society when dissent is suppressed, when facts are suppressed, and people are paid by taxes to both post propaganda and attack others reporting facts.

                            • @petry: I'm not following your logic, by saying I'm not part of this "orchestration" you've claim I'm attacking you for reporting facts? Or are you suggesting I'm getting paid by taxes to post anything on this forum?

                              I believe you've approached this discussion right from the start with a level of animosity that in my opinion isn't warranted

                              • @yannyrjl: your 'opinion' your 'beliefs' - your assertion of what I've said and why i have stated facts is incorrect.

                                In an inane - at times toxic thread - some facts were needed.

                                The animosity you attribute solely to me reveals you just don't like facts.

                                Presumably they get in the way of the agenda on display ….

                                • @petry: Can you address the questions I've raised in these threads? It's not productive where you have chosen to deflect and change the topic when I pose questions to find were you stand.

                                  "based on the notion of "this site will let you", does this mean when you engage in discussions elsewhere, you require site moderator's assistance?"

                                  "I'm not following your logic, by saying I'm not part of this "orchestration" you've claim I'm attacking you for reporting facts? Or are you suggesting I'm getting paid by taxes to post anything on this forum?"

                                  "Do you believe people are guilty until proven innocent, almost akin to so Salem witch trials?"

                                  "What evidence do you have that I was part of an orchestration?"

                                  For context I suggest you read through the thread once again. Selectively choosing what to respond to vs not respond suggest a sign of weakness in argument.

                                  • @yannyrjl: your repeated personal attacks via insinuation reveal your position, and you don't answer any questions clearly and directly.

                                    • @petry: lays out accusations without evidence, and deflecting questions asked repeated

                                      I can logically deduct where you stand on some of these already, lol

                                      go petry the supposed fact teller than can't back up under any scrutiny, starts blaming mods for allowing people to speak freely

                                      I suggest you take some logic classes and debating lessons

                                      • @yannyrjl: You don't answer questions and you attack the person quoting facts.

                                        Try behaving like that in a real debate and see where it gets you….

                                        • -1

                                          @petry: girl, your embarrassing yourself

                                          I've toyed with you enough

                                          you have a good day

                                          • @yannyrjl: You don't answer questions and you attack the person quoting facts.

                                            Try behaving like that in a real debate and see where it gets you…

    • +1

      End result

      So roughly 37% of ozbargainers have a morally repugnant soul and disease riddled mind? Surprisingly low :P

      • the negatives are the oppressed minority

      • how did you work that out?

        • since you demand facts in response why don't you answer the question relating to your math? 5 days latter nothing…..

  • +8

    I am very disappointed that the moderators thought this deal was moved to the forums and yet there are several posts about free PS4 themes that did not suffer the same outcome.

    One rule for one and a different rule for the rest, OzBargain?

    Segregation much?

    • +3

      Agreed, very disappointing. I wonder if the same thing will happen to next year's Pride theme? 🤔

        • Moved.

      • There may not be any themes next year as it’s unclear if the PS5 actually supports them or not.

        I welcome announcements/posts about free avatars, themes and games.

        In most instances, they’re either discounted, are free for a limited time, are exclusives (like those for PS+ users), or temporary mistakes made by Sony offering them for free when they shouldn’t be (incorrect pricing).

        For whatever reasons, other posts of free themes remain, but in situations like this, it became a heated debate with personal attacks and less about being a “deal” or “bargain”.

        It was the right decision to move this to the forums.

      • if you mean a fair debate about hidden agendas in these things, that would be great

    • +3

      This post being moved to the forum is a correct application of the rule.

      Other free ps4 theme remaining as a deal is in violation of the posting guidelines unless the guidelines changed after these were posted or there's some exceptions to the rule.

      Regardless, mods handled this post appropriately as per their guidelines.

    • +3

      If it wasn't BLM it wouldn't be moved

      • +2

        So are you accusing Neil of being racist?

      • Incorrect.

    • Especially when it had 188 upvotes too.

      • -1

        Cherry pick your stats as it had also one of the largest portion of neg votes being 112 . Not many so called deals/bargains get 37.33% negs !

        • Yes I think I will use the stat that there was more people in favour of the deal. That is how votes work.

          Even if you subtract the negative votes from the positive votes there was a high amount in favour.

          Also maybe you need to redo your math, because that does not equal 37.33%. Also quite a few of those votes were invalid negative votes according to the rules.

          • @Gehirn: Why don't you use some logic and look at the portion of positive vs negative votes used on the site to see the significance .
            But that beyond you .
            Don't waste your neg you only get 5 a day Bud :)

            • @popsiee: So you think that a number that is below the majority should dictate a result?

              Seems as if you are the one that lacks logic.

              • @Gehirn: I didn't know it was an Election Site my Bad !

                • @popsiee: It's a site with a system called voting. The concept is pretty self explanatory.

    • Will discuss with moderators but multimedia content that is always free should be posted in the Free Software/Webite Forum as per deal posting guidelines.

    • +1

      OP, I feel for you for this tread although I think there were some fruitful discussions if people can see pass the emotion and abuses. I would think you can appreciate the matter is divisive and I personally believe it's partly by design, as BLM often uses cases that are not straight forward. Take the George Floyd cases as an example, the media took the matter substantially out of context. After reviewing the Raw footage, I don't believe one would be wrong to questions if the police had any intent to kill (all 4 were charged with Murder).

      The police tried to place GF within the vehicle, offer to wind down the window and keep the aircon on when GF complained he can't breathe continuously despite no one having a hand on his neck. His 2 companions were both black and received little attention. It was done in broad day-light with witnesses and passing pedestrians and vehicles. There was even an old black guy on the side of the street providing advice to GF which he did not heed.

      It doesn't make sense seeing the full footage that the police had intent to kill so Murder feels like a far stretch when reviewing the footage in full, better de-escalation training definitely, better equipment for restraint perhaps

      I also have a similar sentiment when rules / laws aren't applied unevenly

      I can empirically observe that BLM didn't have the same outage for the death of other members of the black community such as David Dorn or the 16 year old shot dead in Seattle's CHOP.

      In addition, it's some what unsettling that people were calling for outright banning of other members for having differing opinions on the forum, if you have better ideas, then present the facts and convince people. Calling people names shows weakness of argument.

      • Fact is that

        'David Pinney, a coworker at the club, confirmed that Mr Floyd and Mr (Derek )Chauvin knew each other, as security staff at the club regularly “interfaced” with police officers — and said the two men had “bumped heads”.

        “It has a lot to do with Derek being extremely aggressive within the club with some of the patrons,” he said, “which was an issue.”

        The club, El Nuevo Rodeo, was burned down in the violence that followed Mr Floyd’s death.'

        The fact that the white police officer is reported to have had a personal grudge fully justifies the murder charge.

        A fact you have clearly rejected for obvious reasons….

        People rejecting facts on this site make their assertions appear childish, because reason is expected of adults.

  • Blue lives matter other than in Victoria

    • lol, while don't agree entire, I can certainly understand the sentiment.

    • still editing the bodycams there?

  • +5

    Black Lives Matter.. you mean the terrorist organisation?

  • +12

    So this is what happens when you have free and open discussion on this topic.

    Those that are most upset are used to being on Reddit, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube (where big tech censor and delete any opposing views) and mistakenly conclude that everybody agrees with this society dividing/destroying propaganda.

    Welcome to a fair two sided debate and thank you to the OzBargain moderators for their effort and patience.

    • +5

      I'm surprised commenting wasn't closed. Great work mods for fostering an open community.

      • locked cause y'all can't behave

        • Not locked for me (yet), unlike last time just because hypocrite troll(s) probably reported me.

    • +2

      wow, I didn't see this until now, great observation, I didn't even consider / think of this perspective.

      • You should. That's what 'true democracy' is kinda like. Unfortunately 'true democracy' doesn't exist. There are plenty of fake democracies though.

        • when you say true democracy do you mean direct democracy? I feel just as uneasy with that as well.

          Public opinion is extremely fickle, and often dominated by the loudest voices

          • @yannyrjl: Yeah it will bring chaos. The current democracy is probably the best political system ever existed. I'm surprised we haven't got robots doing all the work for us. I still spent most of my time working rather than living. At least some of us still do. Maybe I just had a crappy job.

            • @El Psy Kongroo: if you actually think about it, automation have indeed taken over a very large amount of jobs that were previously done by humans. I have a broader definition of "machines" doing our work rather than "robots". Robots has some association on how the machines are visually presented which do not actually add to their function, so in order to do the job efficiently often the "robot" doesn't need to take of the form of a humanoid.

              The type work people are doing have changed substantially, manual labour has reduced in the primary food production industries as well as resource harvesting such as mining and drilling.

              Even in the service industries, the machine have taken over, for example people not long keep ledgers or track transactions manually because this function is almost entirely replaced by computers.

              We no longer have secretarial offices where lots of human beings are typing up letters to clients

              To be perfectly honest, even the definition of work has changed over time, if we ask a farm worker 100 years ago to consider if an office work today is indeed working, he may have a different opinion.

              I do agree not all jobs will be replaced, however, there is also the other worry that machines are taking over everyone's jobs / purpose, so it really can be argued whether it is a positive or negative to how our society is organised

              • @yannyrjl: When machines do dangerous and unappealing (back-breaking, stressful, dirty / disgusting, etc) work for us, I reckon it's a progress in humanity. Just need to make sure it's sustainable, though apparently we still have 'population control' in place anyway.

  • +3

    I think a distinction needs to be made between the BLM movement (which has popular support) and the BLM organisation (which may have marxist leanings).

    Deliberately conflating the two is not helpful and those people's motivations ought to be questioned.

    Speaking for myself I support the BLM movement (and firmly believe that black people face discrimination in many if not all aspects of their lives and those individuals and institutions ought to be called out) but do not support the BLM organisation (whatever its particular agenda).

    Consequently, I would think downloading a BLM theme supports the movement (not the organisation).

    • +3

      Mate it was just an exercise in flooding a topic enmasse to put over a hate message - clearly its a technique that will be used on this site and elsewhere whenever it suits those involved, including the mods who allowed it to occur.

      This propaganda based on nothing but spin and hate is the pinnacle of online bullying and abuse, and those involved have no interest in facts and ultimately jobs, homes and families, because all those will be shortly going the pan, because civilisation and systematic hate are incompatible.

      You can see the praise being heaped on this site as a good indicator

      • Imo both you and Eeples are right, the BLM movement and the BLM organization are 2 different things, but this thread was definitely brigaded in one way or another with hateful bs

      • We don’t like that sort of nuanced thought around here.

        • what ? you mean anything more than 1 is hard to consider? I suppose for the truly selfish that's absolutely true - i hadn't seen it that way before…

  • +4

    Thanks everyone for entertaining me while I waited for some tyres to be fitted.

    Well done to the mods for not shutting this down.

  • +4

    Well, this comments thread is about as horrendous as expected.

    • +4

      I know, imagine supporting people who burn down other people's livelihoods, in the same neighbourhoods they claim to represent. Disgusting.

      • +2

        I know - supporting isis terrorist's is much more Australian these days…

Login or Join to leave a comment