Support NeoGAF

[Velcro Fly]

if the game is fun and enjoyable none of this will matter

 

[phoenix296]

They want it to reach some sort of wider audience if they're releasing it in the west.
Even so, that doesn't mean they should lean it that type of stuff.

A "wide audience" is not going to play a 20+hr RPG where they can't understand any of the spoken dialogue.

 

[-Horizon-]

Like others have said, I also doubt boycotting these kinds of games will do anything other than show them statistically that no one buys these niche games in the west so we should stop localizing them altogether.

 

[FluxWaveZ]

if the game is fun and enjoyable none of this will matter

Well, what if the missing DLC scenes made it more fun and enjoyable?

 

[Kandrick]

Like others have said, I also doubt boycotting these kinds of games will do anything other than show them statistically that no one buys these niche games in the west so we should stop localizing them altogether.

Between no localized game and this, i'll take no game. Plenty of other games to buy and play.

If Nintendo is going to pull this shit, why even bankroll a game like this. They shouldn't even bother.

 

[Tohsaka]

You guys are making huge amounts of assumptions about what this development team thinks about this when we have just no clue.

What are you even talking about? The developers don't have say over changes to the western version, the publisher (NoA) does. That's not a matter of opinion, it's a fact. They have to make the changes if NoA requests them, which NoA themselves already said they did.

Like others have said, I also doubt boycotting these kinds of games will do anything other than show them statistically that no one buys these niche games in the west so we should stop localizing them altogether.

If they're going to make all these pointless changes, I'd rather they not bother localizing the game honestly. Other publishers don't make pointless edits like this when it won't even affect the game's rating.

 

[Eolz]

You guys are making huge amounts of assumptions about what this development team thinks about this when we have just no clue.


I did and this doesn't really fit the definition. This is Nintendo/Atlus editing their game on their own.

Again, we can post the self-censorship definition, and again, you'll try to say it doesn't count because reasons.
Fact is, Atlus USA is following what NOA is asking them to do it, whether they like it or not. If they didn't like those changes, they still wouldn't be able to say anything.

 

[Astarte]

lol ;3

Tsubasa is cute!

if the game is fun and enjoyable none of this will matter

But my DLC scenes

 

[Kayo Police]

I'll pick it up used, I know what we have seen of these changes is only the beginning.

I'm done supporting Nintendo with my money on anything they censor.

I'm starting to feel this way too after hearing they're liberally changing plot points for a more family friendly game.

Little cosmetic changes are annoying but tolerable, but outright changing a games'/chapter plot is extremely offensive to me.

And the whole wider audience thing is BS, that went out the window when they decided not to provide the game with an English voice over.

 

[Olengie]

You may not buy the game with pointless changes but Im not going to buy an imported Wii U just to play the "superior" unchanged version.

I want to play this game. In english. Ill take wat i can. Dont care about the DLC either

 

[NinjaCoachZ]

I knew someone would say this, and it's silly. I'm an Ace Attorney fan, I know this.

But the fact that a game needs to be changed during localization to fit the sensibilities of its intended audience still leaves room for criticism. People who are okay with any and all changes due to localization do not discern, they only accept whatever is being presented to them.

Again, I am not a Nintendo executive. I couldn't care less, concerning my personal want for the content in #FE, about how the game represents them or about their image. I just care about playing the game, and the content from it. I do disagree with it, which is why I am posting on a video game message board about it.

Well, I never said it was a good argument, in my defence :V

Think about context. Change is a grey area. It's not a black-and-white kind of thing.

Let's say maybe the film Barnyard gets changed in India because cows are sacred. To an NA audience that sounds ridiculous. But to India that makes perfect sense. The company is simply being considerate of as many people as they can, so they do a change that tries to appeal to them without hurting anyone.

I've touched upon other things, like that I think removing the Hot springs DLC is pretty bad because that actually is a removal of content that directly affects the game.

But I think one of the recurring things I see here is the black-and-white mentality that any and all change is inherently bad. Not every case is the same, has the same reasoning behind it, or comes with the same repercussions. And not every change actually harms anyone.

So while I think it's okay to dislike the change, I just think that some of the reactions I see here, threatening to not buy the game or boycott Nintendo or things like that... I just think that's a bit hyperbolic. It's fine to have principles and all that, but... At the same time, not everything is a one-way-or-the-other type deal, so putting all changes under a blanket of "censorship", I jsut feel that line of thinking is too binary for what is ultimately an issue that is grey or cloudy at worst.

Don't know what you're on about anymore and not sure I'll indulge this further -- when people hear A Clockwork Orange they think Kubrick -- again, the paperwork behind copyright is meaningless. I don't know where you're getting massive public backlash from because this was in regards to A Clockwork Orange, not Tokyo Mirage Sessions.

I meant to illustrate that your example is a bit extreme.

I'll admit I've never read/seen A Clockwork Orange, but from what I know...

1 - It is a whole film in itself. It examines dark themes, but does so in an unsympathetic way, illustrating that they are not acceptable. Removing the unsavoury content directly undermines the reason the film was made.

2 - The posters in this are just a minor part of the game, which is otherwise mostly a fairly lighthearted romp. Changing them while leaving the bulk of things untouched, and simply replacing the posters with those which convey the same type of concept...

So if you're saying that people think Kubrick when they see a Clockwork Orange, that's going to be a bit different. With the film, WB let Kubrick do whatever he wanted and signed off on its release. In your example, they then go back and change the movie after it has already been released. This is a bad thing. They are taking a product that has already been made available to the public eye and then permanently altering it.

This example is the equivalent of George Lucas altering Star Wars and preventing the originals from being released.

This game is a partnership between Atlus and Nintendo from the very start. So the role is that the two companies will have to be co-operating to decide what should and shouldn't be done. The game, originally made in Japanese, must be localized. During the localization process, it is advised that there are some minor,c sometic elements that may be problematic, so they are removed before the game is actually made available.

This example is the equivalent of George Lucas realizing there are elements of Star Wars that may not be received well by certain audiences, so as a precautionary measure he changes them. Maybe you disagree with it, but the two situations are very different. It's about context.

 

[A Link to the Past]

And yet, Nintendo will surely be the target of GG again

 

[FluxWaveZ]

Well, I never said it was a good argument, in my defence :V

Think about context. Change is a grey area. It's not a black-and-white kind of thing.

Let's say maybe the film Barnyard gets changed in India because cows are sacred. To an NA audience that sounds ridiculous. But to India that makes perfect sense. The company is simply being considerate of as many people as they can, so they do a change that tries to appeal to them without hurting anyone.

I've touched upon other things, like that I think removing the Hot springs DLC is pretty bad because that actually is a removal of content that directly affects the game.

But I think one of the recurring things I see here is the black-and-white mentality that any and all change is inherently bad. Not every case is the same, has the same reasoning behind it, or comes with the same repercussions. And not every change actually harms anyone.

So while I think it's okay to dislike the change, I just think that some of the reactions I see here, threatening to not buy the game or boycott Nintendo or things like that... I just think that's a bit hyperbolic. It's fine to have principles and all that, but... At the same time, not everything is a one-way-or-the-other type deal.

I live in the West, and these changes are intended for the West.

And:

Going back to Ace Attorney, I absolutely love the significant changes they made to that series for a Western audience. Changes are not inherently bad, but loss of content is. I guess in this situation, it's that the changes do not seem to enhance the experience in any way.

And if some people are annoyed enough by this that they are unwilling to purchase the game, then good on them. It's their personal decision. You might not personally care enough to go to those measures, but they obviously do. And that's their right, and they are not wrong for their own perspective.

 

[Scientist Supreme!]

It does, but instead of derailing with pointless semantics you should learn to rationalise and reason why you feel a work should be altered for everyone just because it happens to suit your personal tastes more instead of dodging the issue with a pointless distinction between two words that don't mutually exclude each other in the first place.

Nah, a better use of my time would be for you to expalin why you think this is "censorship" when I don't see anybody telling Nintendo/Atlus to make these changes.

What are you even talking about? The developers don't have say over changes to the western version, the publisher (NoA) does. That's not a matter of opinion, it's a fact. They have to make the changes if NoA requests them, which NoA themselves already said they did.

Ok.
I didn't disagree with that. I just said you're assuming a lot.

Again, we can post the self-censorship definition, and again, you'll try to say it doesn't count because reasons.
Fact is, Atlus USA is following what NOA is asking them to do it, whether they like it or not. If they didn't like those changes, they still wouldn't be able to say anything.

There's nothing really wrong with self-censorship if that's what people are arguing against.

 

[axisofweevils]

Yep, the whole thing seems pointless. Also, look at how Atlus handled Stella Glow - a T-rated 3DS game... Yet, somehow it made it through the localisation process with the Hot Springs equivalent intact and no changes to the costumes.

What makes this especially annoying was the Nintendo Direct went to great lengths to point out how the game was true to the Japanese vision - using no English VO as a selling point.

 

[Eolz]

.

So you think making a game about idols and the entertainment industry without elements specific to this in the west is not a bad change?
This is really changing the game's meaning, environmental storytelling, and apparently even more than that (with gameplay content being removed).

Change isn't always bad, sure, but in this case, there's no good coming from it. It's not something shocking in the west being removed, it's not something better for comprehension, and it's not a change that will lead to more sales.

And yet, Nintendo will surely be the target of GG again

Or you know, disappointed fans. Nobody talked about that group until your post.

 

[FluxWaveZ]

Nah, a better use of my time would be for you to expalin why you think this is "censorship" when I don't see anybody telling Nintendo/Atlus to make these changes.

Nintendo:

Any changes made to the in-game content were due to varying requirements and regulations in the many different territories Nintendo distributes its products.

 

[Palculator]

I meant to illustrate that your example is a bit extreme.

I'll admit I've never read/seen A Clockwork Orange, but from what I know...

1 - It is a whole film in itself. It examines dark themes, but does so in an unsympathetic way, illustrating that they are not acceptable. Removing the unsavoury content directly undermines the reason the film was made.

2 - The posters in this are just a minor part of the game, which is otherwise mostly a fairly lighthearted romp. Changing them while leaving the bulk of things untouched, and simply replacing the posters with those which convey the same type of concept...

So if you're saying that people think Kubrick when they see a Clockwork Orange, that's going to be a bit different. With the film, WB let Kubrick do whatever he wanted and signed off on its release. In your example, they then go back and change the movie after it has already been released. This is a bad thing. They are taking a product that has already been made available to the public eye and then permanently altering it.

This example is the equivalent of George Lucas altering Star Wars and preventing the originals from being released.

This game is a partnership between Atlus and Nintendo from the very start. So the role is that the two companies will have to be co-operating to decide what should and shouldn't be done. The game, originally made in Japanese, must be localized. During the localization process, it is advised that there are some minor,c sometic elements that may be problematic, so they are removed before the game is actually made available.

This example is the equivalent of George Lucas realizing there are elements of Star Wars that may not be received well by certain audiences, so as a precautionary measure he changes them. Maybe you disagree with it, but the two situations are very different. It's about context.

You still don't get what I meant: The people behind the removal of this content are probably not the same as those behind their creation. That's it. Just because both of them happen to work for Nintendo -- the copyright holder -- doesn't matter. Whatever themes A Clockwork Orange handles is irrelevant, I just used it as an example where the actions of the copyright holder would very obviously be at odds with the author whose work people actually want. Much like pointing out this is a product by Nintendo doesn't affect the complaints that people wanted the game as close to what the authors produced just because those authors are collaborating with Nintendo in Japan.

Nah, a better use of my time would be for you to expalin why you think this is "censorship" when I don't see anybody telling Nintendo/Atlus to make these changes.

Maybe you're in the wrong thread or don't know what we're talking about?

 

[Maintenance]

"You should be grateful the game is even coming out!"

Fucking lol, they can keep it.

 

[MrSaturn99]

Not that I particularly care about the changes (although out of all the ridiculous "censorship" controversies over the past year I think this is the only one to have any merit), what exactly about the plot is being changed. Do we know that for a fact?

 

[mankoto]

Honestly, I wouldn't be so mad if they were upfront about these changes. As in, just general changes like with what NISA, IFI, and even Atlus USA have done. Communication is key, and just saying "content in the game is dependent by region" doesn't tell me anything at all other than that something has been removed. Having to find out about this stuff via Twitter, comparison screenshots, and a leak of all things is incredibly frustrating.

All they have to do is just say "we toned down the game's sexuality because X" and I would've just accepted it. I'd be mad, but the situation would be much better than this.

 

[-Horizon-]

Honestly, I wouldn't be so mad if they were upfront about these changes. As in, just general changes like with what NISA, IFI, and even Atlus USA have done. Communication is key, and just saying "content in the game is dependent by region" doesn't tell me anything at all other than that something has been removed. Having to find out about this stuff via Twitter, comparison screenshots, and a leak of all things is incredibly frustrating.

All they have to do is just say "we toned down the game's sexuality because X" and I would've just accepted it. I'd be mad, but the situation would be much better than this.

This silence annoys me too :/

 

[FluxWaveZ]

All they have to do is just say "we toned down the game's sexuality because X" and I would've just accepted it. I'd be mad, but the situation would be much better than this.

Yep, an actual statement elaborating on the changes and exactly why they were made would do a lot of good.

 

[Kayo Police]

Not that I particularly care about the changes (although out of all the ridiculous "censorship" controversies over the past year I think this is the only one to have any merit), what exactly about the plot is being changed. Do we know that for a fact?

more confirmations:

https://twitter.com/NintenDaan/status/724295023995568128
https://twitter.com/NintenDaan/status/724294686177931264

These tweets heavily imply they changed something major.

 

[Eolz]

Not that I particularly care about the changes (although out of all the ridiculous "censorship" controversies over the past year I think this is the only one to have any merit), what exactly about the plot is being changed. Do we know that for a fact?

https://www.reddit.com/r/Megaten/co...e_sessions_fe_suffers_more_censorship/d2fct87
https://twitter.com/NintenDaan/status/724295023995568128

All but confirmed now.

 

[Maxinas]

Not that I particularly care about the changes (although out of all the ridiculous "censorship" controversies over the past year I think this is the only one to have any merit), what exactly about the plot is being changed. Do we know that for a fact?

It's implied that content involving a particular dungeon

Spoiler

(the gravure idol dungeon)

might have plot changes because of it revolving around a

Spoiler

obsessed photographer

.

I'm okay with minor cosmetic changes, small details such as age being raised, etc., but if a decent amount of plot/story is going to be changed or even removed...yeah I think i'll pass.

 

[Vlaphor]

I think one big difference between modern edits and ones from Nintendo's past is that we generally didn't know about them. Ignorance was bliss, so we didn't know what we were missing. Now that we do know, I don't think these kinds of changes are viable anymore. The userbase knows what's being removed, so we can't help but feel slighted, especially when the changes make little sense like these.

 

[Kouriozan]

Shame to hear about those changes, I'm still looking forward to it for the battle system though.
It'd be better to know what exactly was modified, but after the last Direct "this game is based on Japanese culture so we're doing X", it feels really bad.

 

[-Horizon-]

Oh wow they even changed a plot point? That is lame.

 

[Eolz]

Shame to hear about those changes, I'm still looking forward to it for the battle system though.
It'd be better to know what exactly was modified, but after the last Direct "this game is based on Japanese culture so we're doing X", it feels really bad.

Yeah, this is particularly hypocritical as well.
"japanese culture so we're leaving this intact, but oh boy, this is removed because we don't like it, even though this wouldn't have changed anything for ratings and sales"

 

[MrSaturn99]

It's implied that content involving a particular dungeon

Spoiler

(the gravure idol dungeon)

might have plot changes because of it revolving around a

Spoiler

obsessed photographer

.

I'm okay with minor cosmetic changes, small details such as age being raised, etc., but if a decent amount of plot/story is going to be changed or even removed...yeah I think i'll pass.

I can understand the concern in this particular example but I'd rather see how it's handled via in-game context rather than reports online. Kinda reminds me of the stuff surrounding Fates.

 

[dlcnotincluded]

It wouldn't surprise me if they changed the plot with the photographer in the least.
Also I bet money the swimsuit DLC is gone. I hate this being kept in the dark about changes until a third party or some news site bursts the flood gates open with "Here is what got removed/changed in TMS"

 

[elyetis]

Needed to think of the children, I mean the children who never saw a deodorant ads, never went to the beach, etc... yet want to buy that undub jrpg set in Tokyo with an idol character.

I guess they will earn some twitter point from that move.

 

[NinjaCoachZ]

So you think making a game about idols and the entertainment industry without elements specific to this in the west is not a bad change?
This is really changing the game's meaning, environmental storytelling, and apparently even more than that (with gameplay content being removed).

Change isn't always bad, sure, but in this case, there's no good coming from it. It's not something shocking in the west being removed, it's not something better for comprehension, and it's not a change that will lead to more sales.

There's no harm that comes from the change either, really, even if it wasn't something that needed to be done or directly enhances things - it doesn't hurt anyone either.

I think at the very least having the posters on the wall, albeit more clothed, keeps the meaning and environmental storytelling intact (i.e. sense of skeeviness, discomfort), it's just a bit less in-your-face. So it's a total lateral shift really to me..

You still don't get what I meant: The people behind the removal of this content are probably not the same as those behind their creation. That's it. Just because both of them happen to work for Nintendo -- the copyright holder -- doesn't matter. Whatever themes A Clockwork Orange handles is irrelevant, I just used it as an example where the actions of the copyright holder would very obviously be at odds with the author whose work people actually want. Much like pointing out this is a product by Nintendo doesn't affect the complaints that people wanted the game as close to what the authors produced just because those authors are collaborating with Nintendo in Japan.

Perhaps Nintendo aren't the direct authors of the product. But here's what makes it different from your example.

One of the game's producers, Hitoshi Yamagami, does work for Nintendo. All decisions made in a game have to be approved of by producer. Nintendo decided that it was important to have one of their own staff members on the project to ensure it meant their standards. As the game uses one of Nintendo's IPs, that gives them reason to want to ensure the game represents their IP properly.

While Nintendo was not fully, 100% hands-on, it's important not to downplay their role as "authors" entirely. They did more than just twiddle their thumbs - by all accounts it wouldn't be surprising if the vast majority of decisions had to be at least run by them or had input from them in the first place.

As I've said though - plot and DLC are different matters entirely than cosmetic stuff. While the cosmetic stuff is give or take, I think it's more valuable discussion to be had in matters like the former two which do directly and tangibly affect the game.

 

[Scientist Supreme!]

Nintendo:

Ok.
I guess all games are censored now. I don't see anything out the ordinary with that comment.

 

[Nyoro SF]

On principle to be told what is and isn't acceptable for me on a cultural level grinds my gears. I was going to give it a pass if it was just simple stuff but if they're going knee deep into the story then I'll cancel my order today.

Maybe in the far future there will be a fan translation or uncensored patch of the game that I can rely on.

 

[SeanTSC]

These tweets heavily imply they changed something major.

Fuck it, I'm out. Changing major story parts on top of Censorship and Cut Content is just way over my tolerance line. Nintendo doesn't get my money. I'm sick of NoA's shit.

And I'm really glad that Persona 5 isn't on a Nintendo platform. If Atlus never worked with them again that would be great.

 

[Maintenance]

And I'm really glad that Persona 5 isn't on a Nintendo platform. If Atlus never worked with them again that would be great.

I shudder when I read people saying that they want(ed) Nintendo to buy Atlus.

Hell, IIRC I even said that once. Now though? I don't even need to answer.

 

[Nightbird]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Megaten/co...e_sessions_fe_suffers_more_censorship/d2fct87
https://twitter.com/NintenDaan/status/724295023995568128

All but confirmed now.

Wow so they are even going so far to change the actual story now?

That's a bit too much

 

[Maxinas]

Fuck it, I'm out. Changing major story parts on top of Censorship and Cut Content is just way over my tolerance line. Nintendo doesn't get my money. I'm sick of NoA's shit.

And I'm really glad that Persona 5 isn't on a Nintendo platform. If Atlus never worked with them again that would be great.

I wouldn't go that far, the game turned out great, it's the localized version that's being butchered to hell. If anything i'm praying to the gods almighty that the NX console is region-free. Not being able to import censorship free games to play on my wii u/3ds really disappoints me.

 

[Vena]

Fuck it, I'm out. Changing major story parts on top of Censorship and Cut Content is just way over my tolerance line. Nintendo doesn't get my money. I'm sick of NoA's shit.

And I'm really glad that Persona 5 isn't on a Nintendo platform. If Atlus never worked with them again that would be great.

It has nothing to do with the platform, its about the IP in question and Nintendo's lordship over their own IP products/spin-offs. The second paragraph is nonsense since Atlus isn't editing *their* own projects on the 3DS in this fashion.

 

[A Link to the Past]

So you think making a game about idols and the entertainment industry without elements specific to this in the west is not a bad change?
This is really changing the game's meaning, environmental storytelling, and apparently even more than that (with gameplay content being removed).

Change isn't always bad, sure, but in this case, there's no good coming from it. It's not something shocking in the west being removed, it's not something better for comprehension, and it's not a change that will lead to more sales.



Or you know, disappointed fans. Nobody talked about that group until your post.

Weird given that a huge push behind stuff like TorrentialDownpour was GamerGate. I'm speaking specifically of Nintendo employees being harassed, which I hope to goodness it's not just disappointed Nintendo fans behind that.

 

[Palculator]

Weird how this "censorship vs. localisation" titwank doesn't happen when it's about brutal dismemberment of people, but when subject matter approaches sexuality it's obviously a crucial part of the localisation process because such a thing is not acceptable in our pure culture and shall not be tolerated!

 

[kunonabi]

Well, I never said it was a good argument, in my defence :V

Think about context. Change is a grey area. It's not a black-and-white kind of thing.

Let's say maybe the film Barnyard gets changed in India because cows are sacred. To an NA audience that sounds ridiculous. But to India that makes perfect sense. The company is simply being considerate of as many people as they can, so they do a change that tries to appeal to them without hurting anyone.

I've touched upon other things, like that I think removing the Hot springs DLC is pretty bad because that actually is a removal of content that directly affects the game.

But I think one of the recurring things I see here is the black-and-white mentality that any and all change is inherently bad. Not every case is the same, has the same reasoning behind it, or comes with the same repercussions. And not every change actually harms anyone.

So while I think it's okay to dislike the change, I just think that some of the reactions I see here, threatening to not buy the game or boycott Nintendo or things like that... I just think that's a bit hyperbolic. It's fine to have principles and all that, but... At the same time, not everything is a one-way-or-the-other type deal, so putting all changes under a blanket of "censorship", I jsut feel that line of thinking is too binary for what is ultimately an issue that is grey or cloudy at worst.



I meant to illustrate that your example is a bit extreme.

I'll admit I've never read/seen A Clockwork Orange, but from what I know...

1 - It is a whole film in itself. It examines dark themes, but does so in an unsympathetic way, illustrating that they are not acceptable. Removing the unsavoury content directly undermines the reason the film was made.

2 - The posters in this are just a minor part of the game, which is otherwise mostly a fairly lighthearted romp. Changing them while leaving the bulk of things untouched, and simply replacing the posters with those which convey the same type of concept...

So if you're saying that people think Kubrick when they see a Clockwork Orange, that's going to be a bit different. With the film, WB let Kubrick do whatever he wanted and signed off on its release. In your example, they then go back and change the movie after it has already been released. This is a bad thing. They are taking a product that has already been made available to the public eye and then permanently altering it.

This example is the equivalent of George Lucas altering Star Wars and preventing the originals from being released.

This game is a partnership between Atlus and Nintendo from the very start. So the role is that the two companies will have to be co-operating to decide what should and shouldn't be done. The game, originally made in Japanese, must be localized. During the localization process, it is advised that there are some minor,c sometic elements that may be problematic, so they are removed before the game is actually made available.

This example is the equivalent of George Lucas realizing there are elements of Star Wars that may not be received well by certain audiences, so as a precautionary measure he changes them. Maybe you disagree with it, but the two situations are very different. It's about context.

1. It is Nintendo's job to sell on their products and create a package that I'm willing to pay for. If their localizations changes get in the way of that I take my money elsewhere or buy the version of the game that I think is worth it. Playing Japanese games isn't a problem for me so I have that luxury. Not everyone can do that and some settle for it, some won't and others inexplicably champion the new version. To each his own.

2. This is exactly what happened with Fatal Frame V. Nintendo is applying the same censorship brush to everything regardless of subject matter, target audience, etc. and that to me is a big problem.

 

[A Link to the Past]

Weird how this "censorship vs. localisation" titwank doesn't happen when it's about brutal dismemberment of people, but when subject matter approaches sexuality it's obviously a crucial part of the localisation because process such a thing is not acceptable in our pure culture!

To be fair, a lot of the recent localization kerfuffles have been given a lot of extra push by GG, and that was before GG.

 

[Palculator]

To be fair, a lot of the recent localization kerfuffles have been given a lot of extra push by GG, and that was before GG.

I don't care about internet tribal warfare and leave it out of this.

 

[Azuran]

Needed to think of the children, I mean the children who never saw a deodorant ads, never went to the beach, etc... yet want to buy that undub jrpg set in Tokyo with an idol character.

I guess they will earn some twitter point from that move.

I don't like the changes either but people need to stop saying this. The swimsuits in this game and everything surrounding them are meant to be erotic unlike going to a beach or watching those types of ads.

The comparison doesn't work.

Fuck it, I'm out. Changing major story parts on top of Censorship and Cut Content is just way over my tolerance line. Nintendo doesn't get my money. I'm sick of NoA's shit.

And I'm really glad that Persona 5 isn't on a Nintendo platform. If Atlus never worked with them again that would be great.

This is annoying to read too. Nothing about Persona 5 would get changed if it was on a Nintendo platform because last time I checked, Nintendo has nothing to do with it. You're one of those people that's scared Treehouse is going to "censored" Shin Megami Tensei IV aren't you?

 

[Dugna]

Just what is even the point of bringing a game that a love letter to the japanese entertainment industry over and then going "Well lets make it as less japanese as possible" while all the while trying to milk money from people who would like this stuff.

 

[A Link to the Past]

I don't care about internet tribal warfare.

I'm just telling you the facts. TorrentrialDownpour, boobslidergate (I don't know if it had a real name lol), etc. got a lot of traction from GG, whereas GG didn't exist to potentially push the issue on TLOU. Just offering perspective on why that may be so.

Just what is even the point of bringing a game that a love letter to the japanese entertainment industry over and then going "Well lets make it as less japanese as possible" while all the while trying to milk money from people who would like this stuff.

Well I mean, how much actually was changed, exactly?

 

[Vena]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Megaten/co...e_sessions_fe_suffers_more_censorship/d2fct87
https://twitter.com/NintenDaan/status/724295023995568128

All but confirmed now.

It seems Nintendo in general (NoA, that is) has an issue with gravure and exploitative photography. This isn't the first time they changed something with this tone, and I doubt it will be the last. Either someone has an issue with the implications of such, or they generally just do not like the concept. They toned down the explicit imagery in Fatal Frame with a very similar scenario of gravure and exploitative/obsessive photography.

I have no idea if its an actual issue in the states that would give credence to them being wary of such implications/symbolism.

Then again, recent things have been super confusing what with the Fates Beach DLC existing and all its "sexy" images, but not allowing you to have units wear swimsuits... but then allowing your units to use the bath house in a towel for all sorts of sexual implications and/or teases. And Camilla. All of Camilla and her lines.