If they remove boobs from games and people say it's okay, then those same people shoud be ok with this too.
And yes, it IS the same thing.
Seriously, you have to be a joke poster and this has to be some lame attempt at a troll.
Localization changes never violate first amendment rights. To think it does implies idiocy and a complete lack of understanding of what rights are. People wouldn't complain about killing gay marraige here because of "censorship" but because they'd be killing what little gay rep there is.Neil Gaiman: Why defend freedom of icky speech?
The article as a whole is about government intervention on freedom of speech, but I think the main takeaway is applicable in this scenario as well:
So now is this censorship or is this still just localization?
The other stuff is coming from NoA, this is coming from NoE. Regrettably the environment regarding same-sex relationships is pretty different between the two (since gay marriage is legal in the US and Canada, but there are some EU countries where it isn't).
It was kinda suspicious how NoE's been relatively silent on the game. :/ I'm honestly seriously disappointed in them if this is true. So much for the whole "NoE is better than NoA!" narrative. What a bunch of chickens.
There's no such thing as oppression.
Of course people would put this on the same level as virtual waifu molesting lmao
Also this isn't confirmed for shit.
Love how the censorship of this game wasn't a slippery slope until they removed same sex relationships, now suddenly there's a problem? There was a problem from the very beginning when we first heard features were getting axed, censorship is unacceptable.
I have a strong feeling this is something they'd rather not push out in PR, as the inclusion of the same-sex relationship was a selling point for the game and really distinguished it from past games.
It's just localization, what are you making a fuss for? Nintendo knows what's good for your region and you should just accept that.
/s
There's no such thing as oppression. People see "oppression" even when they look in the mirror nowadays. Im not into this thing, sorry.
Amazing the people who call that petting mini game, molesting seem to never actually seen said mini game.Again with the "molesting."
I don't think you know what this word means.
All censorship is bad. Don't add content you're gonna regret adding later.Now THIS is a problem.
Fan service and civil rights are not the same thing. Blushing anime girls (and guys) whose faces you can rub have not been historically oppressed and denied representation. They have not been told they don't exist, persecuted for how they were born, and denied the same space to find partners as everyone else.
Including same sex relationships is passive activism and valuable because it acknowledges a humanitarian conversation being had all over the world. Including same sex relationships sends a message of normalcy and encourages acknowledgment of different sexual orientations.
Including alienating fan service is, simply, not any of these things.
Not all content is created equal. A creator or company deciding to remove certain content has more weight when it reinforces a historically problematic dialog about the validity of human sexuality.
And you guys only quoting me for having a opinion on the matter are missing the point completely.
They only do this kind of censorship because people out there support censorship when it's convenient. People should never support censorship.
you ever met a black person before? OR like anyone of a different race that isn't yours
This is likely to be censorship because there stands a very real possibility that it's government mandated if it winds up being true.
... This is not about freedom of speech, this is about corporate changes to their consumer product. Accept that video games are products products that may or may not include artistic elements.
Which is precisely why it stands the very real possibility of being mandated by government agencies. They have to report to several governments and if a single one says, "Representation of gay relationships is against the law," they have to cave to that pressure due to EU games being all-encompassing.This likely isn't limited to just the Italian version.
I understand the basics of how people could conflate the two as they're both cutting content to make the game more "palatable" to some segment of society, but this is a perfect illustration of the, "Is this the hill you want to die on?" question.
I'd go to the wall defending an oppressed social group. Not so much for a "touch this anime person" mini-game. Perhaps some would suggest that still creates for a slippery slope, but I feel pretty confident that I can separate the significance of these two topics.
I mean, does it matter? If the country doesn't have legal same-sex marriage, does that mean all media have to portray that scenario? If nothing changes, how can the country be expected to think forward? It's a fantasy game, not a realistic, set in Europe game.
Yes, I live in Brazil and there are a lot of black guys here.
In fact, I'm standing in front of one right now at work. He's my co-worker.
Neil Gaiman: Why defend freedom of icky speech?
The article as a whole is about government intervention on freedom of speech, but I think the main takeaway is applicable in this scenario as well:
I did acknowledge that comparing first amendment rights to self-censorship was not quite the same thing. What I'm trying to voice is that the moment one decides one morality boundary is ok but not another then it's easy for it to slide to a level that will suddenly bugger a lot more people than before.Localization changes never violate first amendment rights. To think it does implies idiocy and a complete lack of understanding of what rights are. People wouldn't complain about killing gay marraige here because of "censorship" but because they'd be killing what little gay rep there is.
Yes, I live in Brazil and there are a lot of black guys here.
Imo this quote makes the fact that it talks about all EU versions pretty clear:
This is really bizarre, given that the Japanese release includes same sex marriage, right? It isn't legal in that country either. So why is this being done for the Italian localization? Makes no sense. If Japan has the feature, Italy should too.
How convenient that this rumor appears after all the shit of the previous controversies, or I am wrong? This rumor is something fishy.
That's a logical fallacy for a reasonI did acknowledge that comparing first amendment rights to self-censorship was not quite the same thing. What I'm trying to voice is that the moment one decides one morality boundary is ok but not another then it's easy for it to slide to a level that will suddenly bugger a lot more people than before.
Sad thing is, some ignorant parents/persons publicy complaining in the media about "gay propaganda" (or whatever they would call this idiocy) is just as bad when it comes to PR.This will create a 'PR nightmare' bigger than the minigame ever would
is it shocking to some people that you can care about certain things being cut and not care about other things being cut?
So, before you guys start waging war against each other again ... i've got an idea:
We do have italian Gaffers, could one of you please contact Nintendo directly and just blatantly ask about this?
If this ends being true I hope those happy with the petting being removed understand what can happen when you begin to remove things that might offend you and why some if us are against all types of censorship.
Hint: If something offends you, don't buy it, but everyone else doesn't need your superiority complex.
Just in Italy?
I'd go to the wall defending an oppressed social group. Not so much for a "touch this anime person" mini-game. Perhaps some would suggest that still creates for a slippery slope, but I feel pretty confident that I can separate the significance of these two topics.