Crash Station
Member
Wouldn't it be funny if it's not removed at all and it was just misreporting on Kotaku's part.
Fire Emblem Fates' localization doesn't have the petting minigame
- Thread starter kulapik
- Start date
- Status
Wouldn't it be funny if it's not removed at all and it was just misreporting on Kotaku's part.
Steve Youngblood
Member
My problem is with the bolded. They didn't really cut the "gay stuff" here. They're cutting a mode that happened to include some guy-guy and girl-girl face rubbing. Like I said, if the hoopla surrounding this was that it was "too gay," and that's the reason why it got cut, then I would call BS as well. But the objection to it insofar as I can tell had absolutely nothing to do with it being gay-friendly.
I suppose you can see it that way, but I'm really not on board with feeling as though I need to reconsider my entire position on what seems (to me!) like a weird, crappy mini-game just because it was the only mode that didn't enforce stricter heteronormative standards. And has been pointed out, the effect can apparently largely be the same even with the removal of the skinship minigame of physically rubbing the faces on screen. I'd be fine with such a change.
Basically, my stance is that I'm fine with people feeling how they feel. But I'm uncomfortable with any push to make being opposed to this minigame as being somehow less friendly to concerns of homosexuals as though you are homophobic if you're against this minigame.
It honesty wouldn't be surprising if that were the case.
Crash Station
Member
When you say it like that, it does seem rife with unfortunate implications.
Hey Tyeforce, maybe you should start something minor over this.
Pancake Mix
Copied someone else's pancake recipe
That'd be great and would make me feel glad I didn't click on the article. When the thread started I didn't even realise how big of a feature this actually is.
Unless Otero is using Kotaku as a source we have less content.
Okay, that suggests that the petting was removed. Given all other information, it would seem the rest of the functionality has to have remained to explain the "!", which means you'd still be able to "private time" party members... just not pet them.
deadeyekiwi
Member
There were points in history were the church was a political power, your facts are wrong. In recent cases religious groups might threaten a boycott, but they have official power to absolutely surpress anything, at least not in America. They also rarely force change successfully anymore, because religious groups stopped having real legislative power.
Nobody force Noa to do this, they choose to cut out something that might make a lot of people really uncomfortable, and offend people in that matket, and in this specific case I think it was the right choice
Elaugaufein
Member
Unless I'm posting from a dimension where the concentration of opinion and fostered attitude to this is precisely reversed on GAF, its not the waifu people calling for content to be cut.
Battlechili
Banned
At the rate this is going I'm tempted to stop buying Nintendo games altogether instead of just avoiding the games NoA's removing/changing content from.
This is depressing. It keeps happening to game's I'm excited for too. I hate censorship of any kind. I'd be tempted to import the game and downgrade my 3DS to add the fan patch, but I don't want to brick my 3DS or lose any online features. Plus getting a hold of all three versions of this game in English seems like it could be difficult due to the 3 part way this game is being distributed. Isn't one of them digital only to where I couldn't import it?
This is depressing. It keeps happening to game's I'm excited for too. I hate censorship of any kind. I'd be tempted to import the game and downgrade my 3DS to add the fan patch, but I don't want to brick my 3DS or lose any online features. Plus getting a hold of all three versions of this game in English seems like it could be difficult due to the 3 part way this game is being distributed. Isn't one of them digital only to where I couldn't import it?
HylianHero12
Member
So where does the line get drawn of the owner of the IP vs. the developer contracted to create the game? I'm genuinely curious about peoples' opinions on that. And how are people seeing self-censorship with a negative connotation, especially for a product whose purpose is to garner broad appeal?
Just to note, I would consider NoA to be part of the IP owner as they are an extension of NCL.
ShinRPGamer
Member
Side game mechanic that has some extra character bits interactions using Live2D assets. I'm hoping the latter two aren't removed with the petting stuff.
How would an optional minigame have been detrimental to your experience? Serious question.
Elaugaufein
Member
Political Power =/= governing body. Political power can be attributed to a variety of things other than governing bodies. Which was my point, that you don't need to be a governing body to wield political power and be responsible for censorship.
RomanticHeroX
Member
The OED lists it under "self-" with compound terms in which the prefix "self-" is the direct object of the following noun. They list the first attested use in writing to an article published in 1950. It doesn't have a separate definition because it means exactly what the individual elements suggest it means.
So if this is removed, are we going to miss some dialogue? If yes, this is going to hurt my interest quite a lot here.TT
I mean, will us still get that onsen dialogue event here?
Joyful
Member
I think if Fire Emblem is going to grow out of being niche, Intelligent Systems is going to have to think long and hard about what they need to do and what they need to not do. Awakening did really good and reached more people than they ever had, and this will create problems. The people who just got into Fire Emblem through Awakening, at least people I know, have no interest in Fates over the skeevy stuff in it which could put them back into a lower status after Awakening if there are enough people who don't have any interest in Fates for the skeeviness. The reality, they shouldn't have doubled down on that. Awakening was fine with how they handled marriage and relationships in all honestly. Some improvements here and there maybe, being more thoughtful in how things go or progress for less misinterpretations. And that drug thing is bad, no matter how you spin it in Japanese or in English, it was poorly written and dumb that it was going to get taken out or rewritten.
Battlechili
Banned
Personally, I don't like companies doing stuff like this unless its the original developer making the change because they feel it betters their own game. Otherwise, I'm against changes even when its the owner of the IP making the change. I don't like publishers changing or removing content beyond a translation.
This.
It actually really disturbs me how often I am seeing the "you are a homophobe if you are against this mini-game" argument here. As a member of the LGBT community I am feeling very dissonant echoes from the whole topic the other day about Soleli's handling. That topic had many people (some the same) claiming censorship now spewing defense for gay conversion. It's really weird to see people attempt to defend shit like gay conversion and then turn around and claim you're homophobic for stating anything contrary to them about this game mode.
Pancake Mix
Copied someone else's pancake recipe
Yes, definitely.
Road of Ease
Member
Please speak for yourself, not all gay individuals agree with you.
Honestly I find it difficult to see what's nice about petting straight guys who would never marry me. It's just gross.
It wouldn't keep me from buying the game if they kept it but it would diminish it's value. In the end it was NoA's choice to make. I think they made the right decision.
You can't brick unless you fuck up yourself afaik. Downgrade that shit.
I call it self-censorship when the original development team itself makes the change to the original version of the game (though that can be a pretty murky issue). If a localization group is making the changes I call that censorship. If the catholic church had bought the rights to FEF and removed all references to dragon gods and shit, I'd call that censorship even if they owned the rights.
Elaugaufein
Member
I don't think all games should be trying to have the broadest appeal ?
The triple A industry is basically a sludge pit of cinematic action shooters/stabbers with open world and RPG elements because that has the broadest appeal. That's largely because the technical capacity for graphics has advanced far faster than the budgetary ability to meet them which makes things super expensive and requires high degrees of safety to recoup investments. I don't think that's a good thing at all.
Bumbletron
Member
The church was a governing body, though.
I can see your point, however. A more precise definition of censorship should be one body forcing another body to change something. Under this definition you wouldn't have to be a governing body. The important distinction to be made is that the change has to occur as a result of outside force.
This is why I dislike the term 'self-censorship'. It is accepted among many that censorship typically occurs as a result of force from an external source.
Crash Station
Member
No one saw that as gay conversion though and I maintain that it never was gay conversion. It was someone that fell into the Q part of LGBTQ.
The mixed messages are people misinterpreting things.
ShinRPGamer
Member
If they only remove the petting minigame and keep everything else, then no. But if everything about this mode gets axe'd then yes. For what it's worth, the dialogue is on par with the barracks in Awakening but it would still be a shitty loss nonetheless.
It makes great sense in Pokemon though. They're pets. I got to pet a dinosaur! You can also try to get Pokemon to high five you, and you know what Tyrunt does? He can't because his arms are so little so he just bonks you with his nose!
Palculator
Unconfirmed Member
I don't know and don't think there's a definitive answer of authorship when it comes to art hundreds of people put work into, but every thread like this has had some incredibly asinine white noise in the background that tried to get away from the word "censorship" mostly from people in favour of the changes who want to look less authoritarian even though the semantic argument behind it had nothing to do with the topic at hand. That's my main problem with that post.
Road of Ease
Member
The petting minigame is gayer than Soleil confirmed
You don't lose your online stuff. I'm on CFW on 10.5, freely accessing eshop and stuff. There is a very very small chance of bricking, but it's dangerous to ever mess with your NAND (this includes doing official Nintendo updates), so it's inevitable. Just read the directions and you're good.
I don't believe it was either, but no spin can really make it any better because it was written so poorly and the entire scenario is very dumb. I can easily see why it was misinterpreted because it was overall very badly done.
Elaugaufein
Member
The church has wielded censorship when it wasn't an (official) governing body though. And yes , sure. But the thing is , it's almost impossible to tell when a group makes a change because of social movement pressure on them and no company who has done so is going to come out and say so (short of significant temporal distance or upheavals of political power), because it would offend the very people they were trying to satisfy.
That's what a huge chunk of the topic was about and what frankly more or less happens in that conversation. And some of you people kept scrambling to try to defend that shit. It's literally the game saying there's something wrong with you liking other women if she never has a romance option for them. The game "fixes" her by drugging her into loving a man for Christ's sake. Her character is a complete mess. She isn't even questioning, she expresses her disgust for men in in-game dialogue from all that is known. Yet still only has male romance options. It's ridiculous.
SenorArdilla
Member
And it got removed.
nah bro i'mma keep putting sick-nasty sneer quotes around """"""""""""""""""""""censorship"""""""""""""""""""""" whenever i talk about corporate middlemen exerting their power and influence upon the creative process because in this specific instance it removes something from the game i'm okay with losing
the intersection of art and commerce makes fucking fools of us all (except the commerce people, they keep making money) but the willingness to have corporate middlemen decide what is and isn't too offensive or appropriate for audiences instead of letting their own basic cognitive abilities do the same is kind of unsettling.
you can't have your cake and eat it too, people. you can't simultaneously advocate for games being an art form and then laud and champion the Money People for interfering with the creative process for money's sake. the few times that their infringements do things you like-- like taking weird face rubbing minigames out of games that don't really need them-- do not make up for how ready willing and able marketing departments are to totally fuck up a creator's work for the sake of marketability.
in order for video games to be as beautiful as they can possibly be, sometimes we need to let them be ugly. and if we need to see that ugliness by anime's messy light, so be it.
Laughing Banana
Weeping Pickle
Was it that strange?
All the "Hell yeah" responses from the 1st page alone should tell you why they decided to do this.
Really, really lame, in my honest opinion. It's basically harmless, optional content, and there are people here that are happy with the fact that those who want to enjoy it now are unable to do so, just because they don't like the content being presented.
Really, really lame.
deadeyekiwi
Member
I mean political as in directly legislative, not lobbyist, there were points in history, and to this day in some parts of the world were going against the primary religion is illegal, and will result in censorship in some case, and in more extreme case death. In those place religion and government are official connected, but that is not the case in NA so here it normally amounts to just worse sales, and even rarely by a lot. Interest groups might demand censorship but unless they can force it unchallenged they don't have the power to censor anything.
There was no major out cry demanding this content be removed from the game, it was removed just to prevent a larger controversy, which they have the creative right to do.
This is great. Maybe they removed the rubbing but kept the conversation.
Yeah, right.
inspiring
Battlechili
Banned
If I were to do this, and at any point after I finish with FE Fates and whatever other games I import and want to update to the newest version, would I be able to do so without issue in the future?
Road of Ease
Member
They only care about LGBTQ issues when it's tangentially attached to their anime-petting content
Crash Station
Member
Queer, not questioning, as it could be outside of the understood narrative because she clearly falls into her own category at some unknown point on the Kinsey scale. It's a non-standard relationship, not something inherently homophobic regardless of authorial intent.
I certainly didn't switch sides here because I had a different interpretation. I was 100% behind #miiquality and I'm 100% behind Tyeforce here as well in his disappointment with this removal.
Steve Youngblood
Member
This is the position I landed on. The problem is exasperated by the lack of any female hookup options for a character that is otherwise portrayed as a super horny lesbian. I don't necessarily think that there's any date rape or gay conversion at play, but the character's arc is still written extremely poorly.
Palculator
Unconfirmed Member
Quoting for the new page because truth.
You can update to the latest version with no issue on emuNAND already, and keep all the homebrew & etc stuff. That's why you have an emuNAND and leave the sysNAND at 9.2 forever.
- Status