Why doesn't it cross your mind to call them women? Food for thought.
-
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.
Confirmed: Without bonus costumes Fatal Frame V sees further censorship in main story
- Thread starter kunonabi
- Start date
Gaiaknight
Member
So who is doing the OT and when will it be up since we are a coupel hours from the games release date?
Hopefully the OT title will be tasteful.
You're aware that nintendo is the publisher, yes? it is absolutely up to them what goes to market under their publishing name.
Mr Fahrenheit
Member
Yup. The government didn't force Nintendo to change the game. This is not censorship. This is the owner/publisher of the material making an editorial change. Censorship requires government intervention/threat.
i'm in a weird place with this
a) i think the outfits are dumb and have zero interest in them
b) i would like the opportunity to judge on this and other merits the game that the creators made, not the game that Nintendo of America instructed them to make
like, i'm more interested in a game coming to us, warts and all, and letting us decide for ourselves how we feel about it. i dont want a middle man watering down my hot takes.
i'm speaking of course strictly as a matter of principle. there's obviously a clear reason that this was done and its some boring powerpoint presentation about brand alignment and i'm falling asleep just thinking about it. it's nintendo's right to do this and it's my right to feel vaguely patronized even if i dont ultimately care about the content in question.
self-censorship is a thing, you know. which isn't to say this is an instance of self-censorship, but rather to indicate that censorship exists in multiple forms and it isnt all government dictatorship shit.
the distinction is that freedom of speech only protects you from government censorship. other forms of censorship (say, an editor wanting you to edit out a part in your book that you, as the artist, are more inclined to keep-- this is still a person in a position of power and authority infringing on your capacity to express yourself) are not protected against because you do not stand to end up in jail for not obliging it.
a) i think the outfits are dumb and have zero interest in them
b) i would like the opportunity to judge on this and other merits the game that the creators made, not the game that Nintendo of America instructed them to make
like, i'm more interested in a game coming to us, warts and all, and letting us decide for ourselves how we feel about it. i dont want a middle man watering down my hot takes.
i'm speaking of course strictly as a matter of principle. there's obviously a clear reason that this was done and its some boring powerpoint presentation about brand alignment and i'm falling asleep just thinking about it. it's nintendo's right to do this and it's my right to feel vaguely patronized even if i dont ultimately care about the content in question.
self-censorship is a thing, you know. which isn't to say this is an instance of self-censorship, but rather to indicate that censorship exists in multiple forms and it isnt all government dictatorship shit.
the distinction is that freedom of speech only protects you from government censorship. other forms of censorship (say, an editor wanting you to edit out a part in your book that you, as the artist, are more inclined to keep-- this is still a person in a position of power and authority infringing on your capacity to express yourself) are not protected against because you do not stand to end up in jail for not obliging it.
Astral Dog
Member
I dont know, they supposedly never censored Bayonetta 2 (the game has a lighter tone and less violence, but that could be another thing) it could be something from NOA or the new president.
astrogamer
Member
To avoid the obvious promotion of objectifying women.
Actually, they are in this case.
KoeiTecmo and Nintendo codeveloped the game. Even more specifically, two of the three lead writers were Nintendo staff.
They seemed to have worked through any apparent issues
Mithos
Member
Yeah by Nintendo stopping being stubborn, and voila Binding of Isaac can release without changes.
Soyongdori
Member
Every other companies does what nintendon't.
Other companies does the same.
The diference is the amount of backlash
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...ts-too-sexy-male-star-of-mobius-final-fantasy
Should be like 10 times worst since this "CENSORSHIP" happenened during game development, not localization
hurricanes
Member
Other companies does the same.
The diference is the amount of backlash
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...ts-too-sexy-male-star-of-mobius-final-fantasy
Should be like 10 times worst since this "CENSORSHIP" happenened during game development, not localization
I wasn't aware of the change. I actually like the "censor" version better.
cosmicblizzard
Banned
Dude, no one in the media gives a shit about Fatal Frame.
And for those worrying about any legal aspects, uh, both NA and EU get games MUCH more risque stuff all the time with girls that not only look much younger than 17, are canonically much younger than 17 as well. Despite how much everyone loves to use the "1000 year old dragon" defense, it's not a widespread thing. Hell, there are VNs that have been officially released in America that have straight-up sex scenes with what appear to be prepubescent girls.
So yeah, doubt Nintendo was worrying about that.
Other companies does the same.
The diference is the amount of backlash
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...ts-too-sexy-male-star-of-mobius-final-fantasy
Should be like 10 times worst since this "CENSORSHIP" happenened during game development, not localization
The difference is that this was done by the creators of Mobius, and it's not for an international audience. Fatal Frame is different in both cases.
morthbound
Member
Age is such a strange thing. I mean, it's the amount of times you've orbited the sun.
What the hell, do people actually consider the David NSFW?
I can't image what these people would think of some European museums lol.
Fatal Frame isn't art.
hurricanes
Member
For the whole franchise, I beg to differ. For the pondering stuff, I am 100% with you.
thesolidshark
Member
This is unfortunate to me. Even if it was small change, and despite regional differences and undertstandings, it would've been nice if everyone could have the original version. If there's worse things in the game than the content removed, that makes it a bit stranger.
Dammit, I hate this shit, I was on the edge about not buying this game and this probably pushed me over. What the hell are you doing, NOA?
besides releasing it a year late as a digital-only game with no marketing
Damn, that makes it even worse. And it's obvious the issue wasn't her being 17 because they could have just changed that to 18. Why fuck with a super-niche M-rated game like this? I wonder if they'd actually read it if I wrote them an email.
So much for principles, heh.
Having watched the video a third time, I think it depends on the audio. It brings the whole mood down and dispells any else possible impression of titillation.
I'm not sure censorship is the right word. Localization, maybe? It's possible they saw the controversy characters like the Witch in Dragon's Crown or Quiet caused in the west, so they chose to tone down the sexy.
We wanted less sexualised female characters, and now we got 'em. Don't see the problem.
We wanted less sexualised female characters, and now we got 'em. Don't see the problem.
What a strange comment.
I'm guessing xenoblade is gonna have cut content as well
Maybe we get a Waluigi costume for that one. lol
^No, censorship is definitely the right word.
I'm guessing xenoblade is gonna have cut content as well
I guess it depends on who made the call and for what reason. If it was executives at Nintendo and it was against the dev's wishes, then it's censorship. But it's entirely possible the devs themselves decided or came to an agreement that it's best to avoid controversy.
It's not the devs localizing the game. It's NoA. Possible, yes? Likely? No. I also wonder why revealing clothes is such a controversy in 2015 but I guess that's for another thread. You make it sound as if a swimsuit in an M-rated game is some death blow to a game's reputation. When has that ever been the case? And if so, wouldn't that be a tad bit tragic?
^No, censorship is definitely the right word.
I'm guessing xenoblade is gonna have cut content as well
If that cut content is not being able to dress up the female characters (one of whom is 13) in bikinis and bunny girl costumes then I am happy.
Cut away NOE and NOA, remove that creepy otaku wank material.
Or they can replace the character's head with Mario's head if the costume is equipped.
No one will be able to enjoy the costume like that.
Everybody wins.
The original team is almost always involved in localization, they often have to be for programming. And particularly in a case like this where it's their company's IP.
SuperLeviathan
Member
Incredibly, monumentally stupid. This is an M-rated game that's only being released digitally on the Wii U. It's already the niche-iest of the niche-iest of the niche.
What's the point of even doing this? To keep like three people from not buying it? To shield kids from a game they literally cannot find in stores (and has an ESRB explicitly saying its not for them)?
What's the point of even doing this? To keep like three people from not buying it? To shield kids from a game they literally cannot find in stores (and has an ESRB explicitly saying its not for them)?
hurricanes
Member
Smiles and Cries
Member
^No, censorship is definitely the right word.
I'm guessing xenoblade is gonna have cut content as well
Xenoblade is not expected to be rated M so it would have a pass at getting those bikinis taken out
but for Fatal Frame 5 it is a stupid move
they have already messed with Xenoblade X enough with the Dolls to Skells crap so who knows what else Elma might get extra changes for her skimpy end game suits
spoilers
http://bcl.rpen.us/zerowiki/index.php?title=Fatal_Frame_V_Costumes
Itd be interesting to get a feminists view on this. It seems to me like Nintendo is trying to cater to folks who have been outspoken about things like Quiet etc but in doing so have actually removed a theme which would actually resonate with feminists at addressing an actual issue that exists in the real world.
By removing this scene in the West are they basically admitting it only exists to sell to perverted guys who get their kicks from forcing emotionally compromised teens to model in skimpy outfits?
By removing this scene in the West are they basically admitting it only exists to sell to perverted guys who get their kicks from forcing emotionally compromised teens to model in skimpy outfits?
The "trial version" had way more slots for costumes .... but how predictable =P