Nintendo Removes Controversial Fire Emblem Fates Conversation

Coffee Dog said:
The actual meaning of censorship is entirely irrelevant to the thread, because there is no outside agency enacting change. The changes being discussed are, factually, not censorship. That means that censorship is largely in this thread being used with its colloquial definition.
Click to expand...

That colloquial definition is what makes the use of the word so disconcerting to those of us arguing against it. What makes the colloquial definition different from the intended? Is it more lax in its requirements for factual/argumentative use? If so there are plenty of other words that could - and should be used instead. Can you define the colloquial definition of the word? It seems more and more that it simply boils down to, "They made a change that I dislike". You never see it raised against good changes.

As I stated earlier, we are seeing the word used more and more frivolously nowadays, and it is very quickly approaching the same level of integrity in an argument that calling someone "Hitler" has.

I do appreciate your willingness to have a fruitful discussion however, and quite admire your concession of it being 'factually not censorship'. It is much better than a lot of what I've seen in here, and I thank you for that!
 
Jebusman said:
Wait, didn't you enter this thread by bringing up Yakuza, a franchise where the third game had something cut out of it for localization reasons? (i.e, we didn't want to bring Hostess clubs over to america, they wouldn't understand, etc.)

Just for the record, did you cry censorship for that back then as well?
Click to expand...

Yes, I acted upon my beliefs and didn't buy it. :)

We (the fans) demonstrated our frustrations and Sony and SEGA have since learned their lesson.

Nintendo fans could do the same.
 
poet at play said:
Matt..
I was just accused of being a censor for arguing against censorship.

If I don't call people out on their gymnastics, I'm not doing myself or them any favours.
Click to expand...

i never called you a censor, i said that by your own definition (which i find nonsensical) of the term anyone who expresses their preferences in any manner outside a decision to buy a product or not is a censor, therefore you are as well.
 
poet at play said:
I'm accused of being a censor for arguing against censorship, and you direct the snark at me. Haha. Cool ;)
Click to expand...
Do you not find the editing of a product objectionable? Do you not want/demand for that to stop?

Seems to me that, yes, you would want Nintendo and other publishers/developers to be censored from being able to have their works organically evolve.
 
I don't think debating whether or not this is censorship is terribly important to be honest.
Censorship is a word that has so much baggage behind, what constitutes censorship could vary from person to person. While I don't personally consider this censorship, I would listen to people who argue it is.

The question that I think is more important is whether or not anything needed to be changed, and if so, to what degree? We can't really answer the second part of the question since we don't know how exactly they're going to change the character/scene.
 
poet at play said:
Yes, I acted upon my beliefs and didn't buy it. :)

We (the fans) demonstrated our frustrations and Sony and SEGA have since learned their lesson.

Nintendo fans could do the same.
Click to expand...

I'm like, 100% certain Sony would have absolutely nothing to do with it. That seemed like 100% a Sega decision.

Look, I'm arguing on the side that this whole thing isn't as big of a deal as it's being made out to be (To clarify: A few problematic parts of the conversations combined with anime tropes makes people assume/infer the worst), but you're being ridiculous. The smugness isn't helping you either.
 
poet at play said:
Yes, I acted upon my beliefs and didn't buy it. :)

We (the fans) demonstrated our frustrations and Sony and SEGA have since learned their lesson.

Nintendo fans could do the same.
Click to expand...

You can't possibly believe a tiny minority boycott had any affect on future localizations of an already poor selling niche franchise?

Any boycott at that point would simply convince Sony and SEGA that their efforts in NA with that franchise were simply not worth it, not that localization should be a ideologically pure process.

What an egotistical worldview you have.
 
poet at play said:
I'm against censorship in all walks of life, and I do act upon it, yes.
Click to expand...

even if this was censorship, which it isn't, there are worse things than censorship. for example, just because a game developer wanted to put a 'sexually abuse children' minigame in something doesn't make it art that needs to be defended at all costs. i would argue that gradually making that sort of thing 'okay' through a grudging acceptance is far, far more damaging than removing pretty gross and disgusting content.
 
Steve Youngblood said:
Honestly, trying as hard as I can to not be an overly sensitive SJW who is just looking for problems where they don't exist, the best interpretation that I can come up with is that the original scenario is so poorly written that the intent just doesn't come through properly. Given that, I feel like any attempt to completely rewrite Soleil's story, or at least tweak it, can only help the localization process and thus hardly constitutes some sort of problematic censorship.
Click to expand...

I feel like there's arguments that can be made against this kind of censorship/localization on the SJW side. I'm sure there's an argument that this kind of convoluted, non-binary sexuality can exist in real life (and maybe it can) in the same way there are people that identify as otherkin.
 
cosmicblizzard said:
I feel like there's arguments that can be made against this kind of censorship/localization on the SJW side. I'm sure there's an argument that this kind of convoluted, non-binary sexuality can exist in real life (and maybe it can) in the same way there are people that identify as otherkin.
Click to expand...

If one were being disingenuous yes those arguments could be made.
 
test_account said:
Sorry for not wanting to read through 1000 posts, but what has the conversation been changed to in the game?
Click to expand...

“In the version of the game that ships in the U.S. and Europe, there is no expression which might be considered as gay conversion or drugging that occurs between characters.” a Nintendo representative e-mailed us this morning.
Click to expand...

That's all we got so far.
 
cosmicblizzard said:
I feel like there's arguments that can be made against this kind of censorship/localization on the SJW side. I'm sure there's an argument that this kind of convoluted, non-binary sexuality can exist in real life (and maybe it can) in the same way there are people that identify as otherkin.
Click to expand...

Oh gender identity is a very fluid thing but having that characters identity subverted by a sneaky dose of magic powder (or any other magical maguffin) completely undoes whatever 'SJW' points may have been accrued to that point.
 
Lalalandia said:
Oh gender identity is a very fluid thing but having that characters identity subverted by a sneaky dose of magic powder (or any other magical maguffin) completely undoes whatever 'SJW' points may have been accrued to that point.
Click to expand...

Couldn't sexuality as malleable, whether by external factors or otherwise, also be an SJW concept in some ways?
 
vainglorious said:
Several people in this thread have already described why this specific scenario is editorial discretion and not censorship.
Click to expand...

A euphemism. Interesting. Feel free to elaborate on it yourself, or to quote those others you've mentioned.

vainglorious said:
Learn Japanese and start importing.
Click to expand...

I'm not interested in playing Fire Emblem. I came here to argue a principle with those who condone censorship. I find it interesting.
 
Steve Youngblood said:
Honestly, trying as hard as I can to not be an overly sensitive SJW who is just looking for problems where they don't exist, the best interpretation that I can come up with is that the original scenario is so poorly written that the intent just doesn't come through properly. Given that, I feel like any attempt to completely rewrite Soleil's story, or at least tweak it, can only help the localization process and thus hardly constitutes some sort of problematic censorship.
Click to expand...

I basically said this 700 posts ago too
 
poet at play said:
Nintendo fans could do the same.
Click to expand...

I'm not a Nintendo fan, but I'm going through some mental gymnastics to try to figure out why I'd support the inclusion of a patently stupid plotline that contributes to the common (and harmful) idea that gay or queer people are just subject to a passing phase that they'll grow out of or that needs fixing.

You'd argue against the right of a corporation to control the content and intent of its own product - bearing well in mind how that product would be received by its fans - for the sake of some principle of yours?
 
LegendX48 said:
Why was there something like that in it to begin with?
Click to expand...

Different cultures have different sensibilities. Those clamoring for change have the right to do so, but I personally consider them xenophobes with narrow world views.

I personally am okay with the changes though. The gameplay is there still and that's what I'll be there for.
 
poet at play said:
A euphemism. Interesting. Feel free to elaborate on it yourself, or to quote those others you've mentioned.
Click to expand...

We already knew you don't understand what censorship means, but now we know you don't get what an euphemism is either. :P
 
poet at play said:
A euphemism. Interesting. Feel free to elaborate on it yourself, or to quote those others you've mentioned.



I'm not interested in playing Fire Emblem. I came here to argue a principle with those who condone censorship. I find it interesting.
Click to expand...
A principal which seeks to restrict an artist from what they are and are not able to do with their work.

Interesting indeed.
 
cosmicblizzard said:
Couldn't sexuality as malleable, whether by external factors or otherwise, also be an SJW concept in some ways?
Click to expand...

In a lot of ways that concept is embraced by the + of the LGBTQ+ movement... but you have to treat the subject with respect and understanding and from reading the descriptions of the scenario it seems like it was not given either of those things.
 
AniHawk said:
even if this was censorship, which it isn't, there are worse things than censorship. for example, just because a game developer wanted to put a 'sexually abuse children' minigame in something doesn't make it art that needs to be defended at all costs. i would argue that gradually making that sort of thing 'okay' through a grudging acceptance is far, far more damaging than removing pretty gross and disgusting content.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. Nothing much to add!
 
cosmicblizzard said:
Couldn't sexuality as malleable, whether by external factors or otherwise, also be an SJW concept in some ways?
Click to expand...

Not when that malleability is controlled by a 3rd party without their explicit consent, the game frames this as a trick performed by a well meaning friend but ultimately Soleil is drugged without her consent.
 
Jebusman said:
I'm like, 100% certain Sony would have absolutely nothing to do with it. That seemed like 100% a Sega decision.

Look, I'm arguing on the side that this whole thing isn't as big of a deal as it's being made out to be (To clarify: A few problematic parts of the conversations combined with anime tropes makes people assume/infer the worst), but you're being ridiculous. The smugness isn't helping you either.
Click to expand...

Sony have learned their lesson, from SEGA, in translating Yakuza 5, to do an unabridged translation.

Smugness ? Do you want me to downplay my being right ?
 
Lalalandia said:
Not when that malleability is controlled by a 3rd party without their explicit consent, the game frames this as a trick performed by a well meaning friend but ultimately Soleil is drugged without her consent.
Click to expand...

I could see the argument if the intent was to forcibly change her sexuality (though maybe even that can be justified in some reaching masochistic way), but it just sort of ended up being a side effect. This proposed malleability would always be reliant on external factors and it would "just happen".
 
poet at play said:
Smugness ? Do you want me to downplay my being right ?
Click to expand...

Let's start over:

Other than the definition you keep pointing to - a definition which, I might add, has been conceded as being factually not applicable by those on your side, How is this censorship. Give some examples of how this is censorship as opposed to editing. If you can do that, we may be able to have a productive argument here.
 
gaboumafou said:
We already knew you don't understand what censorship means, but now we know you don't get what an euphemism is either. :P
Click to expand...

You aren't really making a point more than you are making yourself look silly. The debate over censorship and editorial discretion has been going longer than this website has existed. Saying that editorial discretion is a euphemism for censorship is hardly an original idea.
 
poet at play said:
Yes, I acted upon my beliefs and didn't buy it. :)

We (the fans) demonstrated our frustrations and Sony and SEGA have since learned their lesson.

Nintendo fans could do the same.
Click to expand...

Thing is, even if they take this kind of thing out or they dont, it doesnt matter for big games were the mainstream audience couldnt care less, now , for games that have a strong niche audience, boycott calls from outside said niche are worthless too.
 
poet at play said:
Sony have learned their lesson, from SEGA, in translating Yakuza 5, to do an unabridged translation.

Smugness ? Do you want me to downplay my being right ?
Click to expand...

Here, I'll try something, I won't "censor" myself. No self-censorship here. None to be found.

You're being a cunt.

No one is going to join your side, because it's all just "haha I know I'm right XD :p :)"

How appealing is that kind of argument? Why would I want to believe you? You are so wrapped up catching people in "gotcha" moments and trying to bait them into logic loops that the entire intent of your argument (one that I only agree with on a theoretical level, not a "this is actually happening" level), gets lost in you being an asshole.
 
marrec said:
Shu was VERY aware over the controversy fired up by Dragon's Crown, a Sony Published game. Aware enough to comment on it multiple times in a apologetic way.
Click to expand...
Which is hilarious, considering that controversy helped Dragon Crown sell way more copies, and the developers thanked the people who were getting angry because there's "no bad publicity"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Nintendo Shadowdrop Fire Emblem Shadows (iOS/Android), RTS Gameplay with Traitor Mechanism
17
451
Jinzo Prime replied
Fire Emblem Fortune's Weave announced for 2026
News  2
91
2K
ThesaurusRex replied
[Wccftech] A Nintendo Switch 2 Fire Emblem Game May Be In Development // Rumor
Rumor 
23
2K
Hudo replied
No Xenoblade, no Fire Emblem, no Zelda
40
2K
DGrayson replied
Nintendo removes all mentions of VRR Docked compatibility from their websites.
6 7 8 9 10
467
21K
Gambit2483 replied
Top Bottom