Palculator
Unconfirmed Member
These don't exist.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Fire Emblem Fates' localization doesn't have the petting minigame
- Thread starter kulapik
- Start date
- Status
As long as you still see the character models and a reasonable number of the animations, I think that's a good compromise for Western culture.
great time for a nisemonogatari gif if I wasn't at work
FunkyDealer
Banned
Wipe off the blood of their enemies.
SolidSnakex
Member
The biggest problem Japanese games face is that last gen the mid-tier market was destroyed in the west. You saw the mid-tier western publishers like THQ and Midway attempt to re-purpose themselves as a AAA publisher, and the end result is that they're both dead now. While the mid-tier Japanese publishers hunkered down and found a way to survive. As long as the mid-tier market remains in tatters in the west there isn't much that can be done as far as Japanese games selling more.
Those developers aren't, and most likely can't, afford to compete with the west in terms of massively budgeted games. You can see that with the panic attack Konami seemed to have over MGSV's rumored 80m budget, which is relatively small compared some western budgets we've seen/heard.
Look at games like Binary Domain and Vanquish. Both were made with the west in mind and both tanked, even though those who played them consider them to be among the best TPS ever made. What's the point of making those if nobody is going to buy them? If none of the western media is even going to pay them any attention and few in the western media pay them any attention?
cosmicblizzard
Banned
Not the same situation. This is a finished product with content being removed for another region. It's not the same as things getting cut during the creation process.
I'd say something like R. Mika's buttslap in Street Fighter would fit your argument more than what this is, which is, by definition, self-censorship.
Absolutely, but if the mini-game's removal is indeed meant to prevent controversy, then it's comparable if that would have been the intent in the fake hypothetical of gay marriage being removed. Different regions, different values, both ultimately censored for fear of "offending" someone.
Since it wouldn't happen in Italy, lets use a more likely example like several countries in the middle east where said content would be removed. It's conforming to the values of the culture to not "creep them out" either way. That's "localization" by the definition people have been championing for a while now. Is it right? Absolutely not, just as it isn't right in this case.
What about the people that want husbandos? What about the people not a fan of removing some of the very little LGBT content that exists, whether intentional or not?
How would you respond to this post?
Steve Youngblood
Member
One thing I want to note here is that advocating care for the global market does not in and of itself mean that you have to tailor it for said market. I understand that some people might adore the direction Fire Emblem is going and may want NoJ to do whatever they want to do and not worry at all about other markets when designing their game. But I don't think foresight would have completely ruined the game if they had considered the implications of skinship getting cut for the American release. Mind you, I'm not ultimately saying they should or should not have included it, but I think it's kind of odd to sort of argue a complete isolationist path lest everything become some Western-focused dudebro game that will fail in both markets. Nixing skinship from the Japanese version during development because it wouldn't work in the West doesn't automatically transform this into a game that's losing its sense of itself.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
Yes, and that's a good thing, which is my point.
I don't really see much of a difference considering I think the original Japanese version would be better without it as well.
The reasons for editing might be "bad", but the end result is improved, so I can't say I care much.
That said I'm not sure if the reasons are even bad in this case since hey, it's just capitalism, right?
I'd say if their craving for same-sex content in a game is so desperate that they'd actually really want this absurd mini-game, it says more about the state of the industry (and perhaps about them... really, you want to "experience intimacy" by petting some anime face? uhhh...) than anything else.
Honestly though, painting the removal of the petting mini-game as a sad defeat for LGBT rights seems really disingenuous and grasping at straws.
cosmicblizzard
Banned
But that's the thing, this is entirely subjective. As made apparent by this thread (and not just the "creepos"), some feel this is not an improvement and overall a worse product due to its exclusion.
I feel like personal attacks aimed at the guy responsible for Tomodachi Life becoming more inclusive in the future is kind of messed up here. This is clearly something meaningful for not just him but other people, and they have made their case in a very coherent and well-thought out way if you've read the entire thread.
In that case, this post sums up how I feel better than I could put it:
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
Of course it's all subjective. Editors use their judgment when they edit. Not everyone agrees with all editing processes.
*shrugs* It's utterly bizarre to me that someone would see a goofy at best mini-game as some sort of LGBT battle, but I'm not LGBT so maybe I'm wrong there. Still, um, really? I'd prefer reading more opinions from LGBT folks about that.
Edit:
Yikes. I think the fans would be 100% right.
if those things did exist, were optional, and they greatly increased the appeal and reach of the Dark Souls, I think it would be pretty sad to watch fans of the old games cry about how the franchise was ruined.
Palculator
Unconfirmed Member
cosmicblizzard
Banned
It just doesn't sit right with me when it's a finished product. Let the game come out without the cut content and let me be the one to decide whether I want to criticize the mode or not. You can't give feedback when you erase something's existence.
There's a few other LGBT people in agreement with Tyeforce in this thread if you want to look for them. Anecdotal evidence, but Tyeforce himself has said he's talked to a bunch of people in the community about it that are with him on it, which only reinforced his belief after he actually played the mode.
cosmicblizzard
Banned
IGN people have confirmed it as well, though not in an article.
Balmung421
Member
Did you look at who Kotaku talked to?
Relationships contributed to the success of Awakening, alongside accessibility for new players, so obviously IS decided to take it a step further, you might argue that they took it too far but that's beside the point.
The game not only kept the new feature introduced in Awakening to please the audience gained through it, but it also considerably improved in the gameplay department(arguably the most important part of the game) to please the old fans that felt Awakening was loosing its roots.
We get a great game for everyone, with relationship features for the players that want them, the petting minigame specifically is a completely optional, innocuous feature, there's never a good reason to remove something like that.
You may find it creepy and it may make you feel uncomfortable, and I completely understand that, but you don't have to use it, the only consequence of its removal is that who would have otherwise enjoyed it won't be able to, while no one gains nothing.
I fail to see how an optional easy mode would ruin that game. I have a lot of friends who bounced off Demon's Souls because it was too difficult, and then never went to try the other games.
Triforce141
Member
cosmicblizzard
Banned
I just can't fathom how optional content that doesn't effect the overall experience for players that want no part in it can be so offensive to some.
Like, a personal example for me would be if there was some kind of boring optional chocobo petting mode in Final Fantasy 7 remake. What do I get out of it by campaigning for its removal? Peace of mind that one of my favorite games didn't get "tainted"? No, I get less content and I look like an asshole!
The only possible explanation I can think of that doesn't involve Schadenfreude is wishing the developer spent time on something I did care about rather than something I didn't, but that loses relevance when it's a finished product.
I am open to the idea of IGN parroting Kotaku, since there's nothing that suggests they've confirmed it themselves.
Yes, but the quote they have lacks context and it looks like it's missing information. Maybe they did a poor job of articulating it to Nintendo, because the response they got, especially the later parts, doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Them omitting the question they posed, word-for-word, also raises suspicion.
SolidSnakex
Member
I feel in part that this is coming from what happened last gen when it was well known that Japanese devs were attempting to cater to western tastes. The quality of Japanese games for awhile dipped along with sales. So any mention of changes to suit western tastes is immediately met with disdain or at least hesitation because of how badly last gen went.
There's also an issue with western branches not necessarily knowing what gamers want. Yakuza 3's removal of the hostess club is a good example of that. It was removed in part because of a tight schedule and because they didn't think it'd resonate with gamers. There was a big backlash against that, and they've since kept it in with localizations and it's become a rather popular feature among western gamers.
I think if optional content was sufficiently offensive and horrible, like optional racism or homophobia, that would probably be enough to keep me from buying a game. I don't think face petting meets that standard.
honestly this makes me wonder how people are able to use the internet if this effects them so badly.
Steve Youngblood
Member
I understand that you already responded to this post with a challenge. I didn't reply back not because I was ignoring you, but because I don't have a way to clarify with exact certainty where I'd draw a line in the sand. But just because I don't feel like re-typing the exact same thing, my answer to this was basically the following:
Yes, I understand the petting mini-game may not seem like a satisfactory thing to challenge in terms of how much it affects the game's tone, but that's the gist of where I'm attacking this from.
cosmicblizzard
Banned
This I can understand. While not me personally, some cannot divorce that kind of content from the rest of the experience. It's the same logic behind not being able to separate the art from the artist which many people are understandably incapable of doing.
But yes, face-petting is not that.
I really hope you can still talk to the characters in first-person at any time and see their character models. They don't need to have the "petting." Although it'd be nice if they found a way to still include the different emotions during the course of conversations. Again, I love the models and animations.
Or they're showing off the content they (and others like ProJared) recorded at an event Nintendo invited them to. I think other titles like Bravely Second and Final Fantasy Explorers was present as well.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
I disagree that it would not effect the overall experience.
Why would you look like an asshole for not wanting something boring in a game you like?
Not really. Movies excise scenes that they already filmed all the time. Editors sometimes remove entire paragraphs from books that were already in the manuscript. If they do their job right, it will make the product better (and yes I'm aware it's possible that they can do a bad job at it).
Palculator
Unconfirmed Member
We've had a rather lengthy thread about this recently that gives plenty of reasons against this (a lot of which aren't "git gud.") It was kind of dumb and petty in many places (people fucking called this racism) but there are good posts in there if you want to see some more detailed arguments.
Again, my problem with the comparison is how closely tied the difficulty is to a Soulsborne game and its design whereas the petting minigame was more of a fun bonus on top of the main game.
For one, I don't think you really have a full understanding of what all this feature entails and doesn't entail. See my previous post:
If you've seen a single video showing the husband/wife of the player character being used in this mode, you have not seen it all, and it is different depending on the character you invite. People seem to think that this mode is basically some kind of erotic dating sim or something, but it's really not like that at all, and intimacy is only really shown in a romantic way with your husband or wife in the game, not all other characters. But other characters still show different kinds of affection, and the feature provides a way to get to know your characters better. I understand that people think the nature of "petting" heads is weird, and I get that, but regardless, there's nothing that's really inappropriate or "creepy" about this mode like people seem to believe.
Secondly, I've got a husband and no, I don't need to "experience intimacy by petting some anime face," thank you. =P This isn't about sexual fantasies or anything, this is simply about wanting to be able to form stronger bonds with more same-sex characters in the game, since I'm not given that option in the localization even though it exists in the original game. I could do without the face petting, even, that's not the point of interest here. I certainly don't mind it, of course, but it's making deeper connections with the characters that's available within this mode that I want, not the petting. (But I don't think there's anything particularly wrong with the "petting," either.)
It's more like separating the art from the art.
I enjoy a lot of classic literature that also happens to contain material I find objectionable. Would I like it even more without that stuff? Yeah, probably.
I feel for those who were genuinely looking forward to this mode in order to spend more time bonding with the game's cast but it shouldn't be difficult to imagine why those who feel otherwise about the content might prefer it cut. Optional or not, it does contribute to the identity of the work.
Road of Ease
Member
I'm a gay man, and I agree with you, as well as other LGBT people in this thread. I don't see it as a gay issue AT ALL.
cosmicblizzard
Banned
What's the inconvenience to me for something that is completely optional to be in a game? Taking a fraction of a second to scroll past it in a menu? Not going to the location where said optional content takes place? My completionist OCD flaring up and making me do it anyway despite finding it boring?
What's the inconvenience to a person that DID want that mini-game I found boring to be removed? Now they have less content and disappointment while the people like me that didn't want it get to feel good about themselves. Hurray, I'm now officially an asshole!
First of all, what you're describing is not optional content. Optional content does not mess with the pacing of something like a dragging scene in a book or movie.
Second, I should have said released product rather than finished, which Fates is. Yes, there are revisions to already released products in some cases, but the non-revised products still exist.
In this case, the non-revised product also exists... in a language I don't know on region-locked hardware.
He won't ever respond to it directly because he got found out. Anyone who defends Soleil's story is also defending the rhetoric upon which gay conversion therapy is based on.
The skinship stuff is NOT an LGBT issue so stop using it as a shield to deflect criticism of it.
How about they talk to you about something and you react to that from options given to you?
This way, the Live2D engine stays intakt as well as the dialogues. They may not be voiced but that seems to be an acceptable middle ground.
Even though that'll make the feature be a full-fledged Dating Sim though lol
sensui-tomo
Member
You can play it in english, if you hack your 3ds/n3ds/2ds. While keeping all the necessities of online play and whatnot. (and not getting banned unless you cheat)
I don't necessarily see this as an "LGBT battle," and no, this isn't quite on par with the issue in Tomodachi Life, but the point is it's removing potential same-sex content in a game that already severely limits its same-sex options compared to its opposite-sex options (of course, it's great that those same-sex options exist at all, but it's not so great that it's so limited). I know I don't seem to be getting much support from other LGBT individuals in this thread (which I find rather disappointing, honestly), but I've spoken with many others in person and elsewhere outside of this thread who feel the same way as I do. I'm not trying to place any kind of blame on Nintendo as if they're purposely cutting this content to spite LGBT gamers or anything, of course that's not the case. I'm just trying to raise awareness of this other perspective (and also educate people on this touching feature of the game, because many people have the wrong idea about what it is) in hopes that more people will understand and speak up and maybe we won't have content cut like this in the future.
cosmicblizzard
Banned
I admitted in a separate post I was wrong about that. I've since read more arguments in favor of seeing it as gay conversion and I see where they're coming from whereas I hadn't before. I still don't think it was intentional and agree with Steve that it's just poorly written rather than making a statement about anything, but I'm not telling anyone they're wrong.
After that, I would only defend it on the basis of letting it see the light of day so it can be properly criticized.
That's why, more than anything, I'd just kind of hope IS can look at this and go "hmm, is this really the best way to further the concept of creating bonds with your soldiers?" I mean, the mode even got flack in japan itself, so it's a sign that maybe they're going a bit too far on some of this stuff.
Is an optional face petting mode a big deal when you think about? No. Everyone turned off by it would have just ignored the mode, and ultimately missed out on some optional dialogue. But it does affect how the brand is perceived, and the closer that gets to, well, "Idea Factory", the more that's going to be a weird sell in the west. That's where Sakurai's analogy falls apart. Sure, you could say that it's a bonus thing that doesn't affect the full package.... but in some ways it does. It's optional, but it's part of the game's identity.
This is exactly the discussion I had with a friend today. Not only about this game in particular but the overall of evolution of Japanese RPG. I was a huge JRPG fans in the SNES/PSX/PS2/360 area and for the last few years I can probably count on my hands the number of JRPG I played. I love the Trails of series but Cold Steel had me really disappointed with all the perverted stuff. It also got in the way when I played Danganronpa 2. Some JRPG always had a certain level of perversion but it never bothered me until some studios went full throttle towards this path.
I severely dislike otaku stuff and it gets in my way from enjoying game so I'm buying much less JRPG than I used too. I feel like I'm not the target audience for these games anymore outside of the rare few games where that kind of content isn't prevalent.
I won't shed many tear over this removal either.
MHWilliams
Member
Give the internal pushback in the dev team, the fan response in Japan, and the outright cutting of the content in the West, I'd hazard they'll look for a way to incorporate the Live2D artwork and conversations in a method that doesn't involve touch. No reason to use those resources on a feature that has come across as "shrug" for many.
Of course, the next Fire Emblem could be on NX, so we have no clue what kind of assets or controls to expect there.
I find there are similar sentiments across gaming and anime. "I'd like this except for X% of additional fanservice" where the X is different from person to person. The realization is that some Japanese developers and consumers are aiming for a niche of fervent consumers (many times a niche those creators are a part of). Unfortunately, this means the export potential of those products are lessened.
I personally am more annoyed at a show like Fairy Tail having occasional fanservice in the form of battle damage clothing, than I am something like Ikkitousen, which is firmly aimed at that type of content. The bleed in is what bothers some.
cosmicblizzard
Banned
Well, I'd still like a professionally-done translation, just with the cut content back in. If there was a way to have that and the fan-translated skinship scenes, I'd be all for it.
It seems the fan translation community is trying to figure out ways to add the skinship back into the US special edition version, so we'll see I guess.
Road of Ease
Member
You know, it's worth mentioning that I'm not all that invested in excluding this content. I may dislike it, be disappointed that IS added it and fail to see it as anything more than a fetish, but I wouldn't care if they kept it.
At the end of the day it was NoA's decision to remove it. It's only speculation on my part, but I'd say they removed it because they don't think most western SRPG players (straight or gay) would understand the relevance of this sort of "deeper", "more intimate" interaction with anime characters. And going by most responses in this thread as well as my own, I'd say they were right.
- Status