Support NeoGAF

[Haly]

Here's one take on it.

Localization is a business. The end goal is to not share one culture's output with another culture, but to extend the shelf-life of a product by moving it to a different market with its own standards and regulations. Therefore, translation "purity", or whatever you want to call it, doesn't really apply. Whatever changes a localization team decides to make, cutting or altering content, are purely business decisions intended to maximize their returns.

Where would it apply, then? Scholarly translations, for one, like the translation of The Ring of Nibelungen to English, or Romance of the Three Kingdoms to Japanese. The entire point of projects like these is to break linguistic barriers in academia. Another example is hobbyist translation and one everyone is likely familiar with is the fansubbing of anime. Both of these types of translation have one and only one goal in mind: to experience and share art from a foreign culture as it is.

 

[NinjamicWZ]

When you try to make stuff appeal to people who hate foreigners.

 

[sonicmj1]

The thing that annoys me in all these recent discussions is that they generally don't seem holistic. People point to a single screenshot comparison or a single costume and claim the whole translation is now worthless, without even attempting to compare the works as a whole. What's the point of that kind of criticism? It's easy to understand for someone who isn't going to try to experience both languages, but it doesn't actually reflect whether or not the translation is accurately capturing the spirit of the work as a whole. It's like critiquing a film by nitpicking continuity errors and plot holes instead of discussing the overall storytelling, character arcs, and film-making techniques used.

That's why it's hard for me to get upset about the Fire Emblem Fates stuff. So what if a line or two seems too playful for some, or isn't quite accurate to the literal meaning of the Japanese? The question that matters is how well the work as a whole captures the spirit of the whole original Japanese game. I find that traditionally, Nintendo's games have been fantastic at achieving just that.

A translated work, at the end of the day, has to stand on its own. If that requires changing a few things for the sake of preserving the overall spirit of the work, then so be it. There's no reason to expect readers to forgive ruined jokes, incomprehensible references, and clunky phrasing just because they're reading a foreign work. They should be able to experience these games (or books, or movies) the same way they were originally experienced: fluently expressed in their native language.

I find it bizarre to see people calling games that were unqualified success stories like Phoenix Wright over-localized. I mean, it's easy to look back at Capcom's decision to move the game's setting now and call it a mistake, but if Capcom had chosen to preserve all the Japanese names and puns as they originally were, then the entire playful atmosphere of the work is dashed against the rocks for the sake of fetishized orientalism. Because of the choices they made, the series was a breakout success, reaching people who otherwise never would have considered playing a glorified visual novel in a million years.

There's obviously a balance to strike (perhaps somewhere shy of Clinton jokes), but I'd never want to place Japanese games in a textual straightjacket for the sake of a supposed "purity" that can't truly exist.

 

[MHWilliams]

You can keep saying it but it doesn't make it true. I get sick of people implying that it's not real censorship because it's not an overbearing government law or something - censoring yourself is still censorship.

Where do you find the line between editing and self-censorship? Given that these games are products made by teams with multiple outside stakeholders.

 

[Village]

To answer the person above me, I would imagine the person or persons you are saying so what to, value that thing that is gone or was changed. You keep mentioning how does it compare to the orginal as a whole product, maybe some thing its largely less deepening on how they translated it. You keep saying judge it as a whole, when a bunch of people probably did... and like it less. And if they did, your argument falls apart at people valuing other things than you do.

My next point is you mentioning nitpicking continuity errors and plot holes... actually those can ruin a whole story. Infact in the flip side, ignoring these things, a lot of times I feel is bad criticism, you get told to not sweat the details, no the details are important and can fuck up your thing. Not related to translation errors... but I wanted address that

Lastly, my stance on this.
Do I believe that self censorship is censorship , in some cases, yes. They work for a company, sometimes you get told not to do something and you don't do it. You know, that said, thats the price business. You are an employee, or contractually employed, someone is publishing your work. They have their own interests. And if things are changed in translation, and someone higher up approves of that, it sucks sometimes. Sometimes it keeps creep shit out and i'm totally fine with that. But yeah.

If you have issue with that's less the concept of censorship, and you having an issue, creator vs publisher business arrangements. And social norms. And the first thing is definitely a conversation to have. It goes into copy right and a bunch of other stuff worthy of talking about it.

But it isn't censorship or it is rather, but its... kind of your job. You fight for what you want, and if you can't. You just do your job, or try and find another job.

 

[alvis.exe]

Except this wasn't the case in the Japanese version. It's the same in all routes.

Really?

I was under the impression that the only time the katakana was used was in Revelation to refer to the

Spoiler

Omega Yato

which wouldn't exist in the other routes. Double-checking Japanese text for Birthright Ch8/19/27 and Rev Ch9 (only saw 炎の紋章 used) and Rev Ch15/27 (both are used) seems to confirm this but I didn't want to go through the full videos let alone an entire playthrough.

Think you could point me towards a specific chapter in Birthright/Conquest that uses the katakana instead of the kanji? I don't actually care how it was localized (though they've been very consistent in keeping the distinction from all the videos I've seen, something that I can't say about the fan translation where the nuance was completely lost...), but I've spent too much time on this now not to get to the bottom of it haha.

 

[mugwhump]

No, it isn't. It's reflective of the fact that artists do not create their art in a vacuum but in a society, with other people. Responding to the feelings, concerns and criticisms of others is not censorship. The artist's voice is not being forcefully taken away.

To put it another way: if you are afraid of being shouted down for saying something stupid, perhaps you shouldn't say stupid things. Nobody has a right to say whatever and be free from criticism.

I don't call such localization changes self-censorship. I just call it censorship. Nintendo of America are not the original authors. Games can be patched, and if the authors wanted content removed from their games, they'd do it themselves. Obviously developers can an do change their own games in response to criticism, and in such cases it can be quite unclear whether there's self-censorship going on, especially when the game is changed before release. But once there's a complete Japanese version, that call gets way easier to make.

Anyway, you're attempting to redefine the meaning of the word. People have consistently used "censorship" to describe egregious removal or changes of content in localizations since basically forever. When NoA removed crosses from their own games people called it censorship. When 4kids changed a character's cigarettes into lollipops, people called it censorship. When content is cut or replaced during localization to make it more safe and inoffensive for the masses, it's called censorship. When 95% of people use a word a certain way, that's generally what it means.

That's not to say there's no subjectivity involved in what's called censorship. There is. But there's a pretty strong pattern to how the word is used.

Where do you find the line between editing and self-censorship? Given that these games are products made by teams with multiple outside stakeholders.

I think the most important factors are:
-There is an already complete version made by the original authors, which is edited by a separate group of people.
-Changes are non-textual. The line can be blurry with textual changes, since the game needs to be translated from a foreign language. But if graphical content is removed, that's a big red flag (see the fundoshi outfit in XCX, or the missing swimsuits in FE:F).
-Changes are made for the purpose of being less offensive and more family-friendly, as opposed to changes made to be less foreign and more understandable. This can be subjective as well. For example, 4kids removing violence from the pokemon anime is widely considered censorship, but changing onigiri to donuts is much more arguable. Generally, if the removed/altered content is violent, sexual, religious, or politically sensitive in nature, it's considered censorship.

 

[Reluctant-Hero]

As some who has been playing games since as long as I can remembered (1984, when I was 4), I'd rather have a product that was "censored" than not having it in English at all.

I'm sorry, but video game consumers have become way too self-entitled these days. Would you rather we not have games publisher outside of Japan at all? Then wait years for fan translations, like the case was with Mother 3 and Seiken Densetsu 3?

 

[mugwhump]

As some who has been playing games since as long as I can remembered (1984, when I was 4), I'd rather have a product that was "censored" than not having it in English at all.

I'm sorry, but video game consumers have become way too self-entitled these days. Would you rather we not have games publisher outside of Japan at all? Then wait years for fan translations, like the case was with Mother 3 and Seiken Densetsu 3?

Bit of a false dichotomy there. In a rare handful of cases (like criminal girls or something) where the game wouldn't have been able to be sold uncensored, then I agree censorship is preferable.

But do you really think Nintendo would have passed on xenoblade if they'd been forced to keep the breast slider or fundoshi outfit, and would have skipped fire emblem if they'd had to include the face-rubbing or swimsuits? I doubt it extremely. Those things wouldn't have even bumped the ratings up from T if the ESRB's past history is anything to go by.

Not to mention, videogames are interactive, and we have DLC now. How come NoA will force a third party developer to make two entirely new costumes for Fatal Frame, but can't ask Nintendo's own teams to make something you can download to restore xenoblade or fire emblem? They could even lock it behind a credit card. There are perfectly viable solutions; NoA just doesn't care enough to implement them.

 

[sonicmj1]

To answer the person above me, I would imagine the person or persons you are saying so what to, value that thing that is gone or was changed. You keep mentioning how does it compare to the orginal as a whole product, maybe some thing its largely less deepening on how they translated it. You keep saying judge it as a whole, when a bunch of people probably did... and like it less. And if they did, your argument falls apart at people valuing other things than you do.

If people are judging it as a whole, that's fine. For example, I really enjoy RE4's campy writing as someone who doesn't care about the series as a whole, but I know News Bot takes issue with how some of the anti-American sentiment Saddler expresses in the English changes the motivations of Los Illuminados and the Plagas. I don't think that creates a problem personally, but I respect that.

When people come into threads with screenshots of a single instance of doge in Triforce Heroes, or someone saying, "That's dragon for 'I love you!'" in Fire Emblem, I feel like I can't fully evaluate it. What about the rest of the conversation? Is all the meaning really being lost? Most people seem to have no idea.

 

[dity]

This is one step too far:



That one and "Seal of Flames" instead of "Fire Emblem"

I mean... Is the name of the game ffs. How can you miss that.

Looks like they gave her some personality beyond just being a female head stating that the world is dangerous.

 

[Phu]

Anyway, you're attempting to redefine the meaning of the word. People have consistently used "censorship" to describe egregious removal or changes of content in localizations since basically forever. When NoA removed crosses from their own games people called it censorship. When 4kids changed a character's cigarettes into lollipops, people called it censorship. When content is cut or replaced during localization to make it more safe and inoffensive for the masses, it's called censorship. When 95% of people use a word a certain way, that's what it means.

One Piece is a prime example. Funimation did/does localization right. 4Kids screwed it up.

Cultural differences, targeting an audience, maximizing appeal, whatever reasoning you wan to apply to changes during localization. I guarantee both Funimation and 4Kids put all these things into consideration, except 4Kids was willing to drastically change the original work while Funimation doesn't appear to change what isn't necessary.

 

[jonjonaug]

I get the spirit of the video but nobody expecting "shachou" or "nakama-doushi" in anything other than joke subs. I don't think I've ever seen an argument about people missing honorifics in gaming, more of a fansub thing. We can discuss the merits of it Persona 4 for instance, but has that come up in any of the recent localization brouhaha?

Persona 3/4's translation is an interesting case because it doesn't actually preserve honorifics as they are in the Japanese release. The usage of honorifics is changed to the level of politeness that you would expect in an actual English conversation. There's places in the script where stuff like "last name-san" was changed to "first name-kun", or some nicknames were changed to what would be more familiar to American weeaboo audiences at the time (Yukaricchi to "Yuka-tan").

 

[RK128]

I didn't play more recent examples (ex: Nintendo's Wii U Games like Fatal Frame and 3DS games like FE Fates) but my stance on localization is this; if the game is translated into English and I can mostly understand it, I'm happy.

Something like SAO Hollow Fragment is a case where localization was too lax (Vita version), as the English script was filled with typos, grammatically wrong statements and overall awkward sounding characters. But Lost Song fixed this by making the translation more in line with the JP version of Season 2 (characterization wise).

I also like when localization changes some unique elements in games and it leads to some really amazing results. I've been making a retrospective on the Sonic series and one game that was hit hard by localization was Sonic CD, but in a really cool way; we got TWO great soundtracks out of the situation!

Here is a link to the thread I made covering the soundtrack but it leads to two amazing scores when we could of just gotten one. THAT is localization done in a nice way I feel .

Hearing what Nintendo is doing with Fatal Frame Wii U, Xenoblade X. FE Fates, or Bravely Second (they are the ones localizing that, right?) does bother me a little bit. I appreciate that they don't want to offend people with some of the more suggestive content that is the native JP versions of those games but it goes too far on some cases.

FE Fates removing an entire gameplay mechanic (even if I could see why they did so) for the English/EU versions of the game is annoying.......but you still get those scenes that the gameplay mechanic is linked to. So I feel mixed regarding that :l.

Once we get official news on #FE's localization, then I'm very interested to see how Nintendo localizes that game. Pop Songs, Story content and more might be completely gutted, changed or altered when its localized due to it being so drenched in JP culture; depending on how Nintendo handles that one, the censorship vs localization topic will come to a head.

I only see Nintendo and Square Enix have issue with localization, though there are some exceptions (Bamco not having JP VA for the localized versions of God Eater Resurrection and Rage Burst 2 for example, instead having only English VA for the games; though its likely from licensing issues).

I'm hopeful that a balance between censorship and localization is meet this generation, as we are close to hitting it I feel. Again, it really feels like Nintendo is the one behind in this spot (as they are the ones in the center of all these topics), so hopefully they nail this balance with Zelda Wii U, the rumored Paper Mario and #FE this year.

 

[foxuzamaki]

It's actually a perfect example of a translation undoing itself by overly dating itself.

People are talking about not wanting to need to look things up all the time, well there you go. Let's just put dated memes into our games that people will need to look up to understand one day!

If you look all over the internet besides neogaf you can see that meme is still getting use constantly

 

[Melchior]

My take on it is that I want everything that the original version had. And if I can't receive that from the localized version I will simply purchase the original version. It might be a hassle but that's about it.

I understand why people shout censorship but we have no real say in the matter. Who knows what goes on behind the scenes maybe the condition of them localizing would be that they have to get rid of X thing so it's either that or we don't get a localized version.
edit: Though I do understand why changes happen due to different cultures and what not. I see nothing wrong with it since they aren't just trying to sell to the people who want these games but also maybe reach into different audiences who might think some things are weird.

 

[Mephala]

I don't think there is a thing to be honest. We might not like it but it is better than no localisation at all.

I also think it is ok if the original developers were made aware of the changes or their company at least came to the decision rather than say, 3rd party localisation team choosing poor words and omitting important dialogue or changing the tone of the games/characters.

If I had made a game and have the opportunity to have it localised for Japanese audience. I would consider alterations for it to be more enjoyable or appropriate. I would do the same if it was going for the West. The tricky part is to not lose your game in the process I guess.

 

[jonjonaug]

Hearing what Nintendo is doing with Fatal Frame Wii U, Xenoblade X. FE Fates, or Bravely Second (they are the ones localizing that, right?) does bother me a little bit. I appreciate that they don't want to offend people with some of the more suggestive content that is the native JP versions of those games but it goes too far on some cases.

Bravely Second is being done by Square Enix. I believe the "changes" to the sidequests are mostly due to Square Enix using the second release edition of the game as the base. Bravely Second and the first game both got heavily panned for requiring what amounted to multiple playthroughs of a kind of boring game to play to see all of the content, both in Japan and overseas. I doubt the changes were because bad things could happen in the quests and Square Enix didn't think players could handle that, rather Square Enix received backlash because it would take multiple playthroughs to see the best outcomes, and in fact the version we're getting there already exists in Japan. The changes to the costumes are what I would call actual censorship though, and a lot of them are pretty freaking silly.

Xenoblade X's translation to my understanding was mostly done by 8-4 and not in-house by Nintendo, the translation is excellent and the only real changes to content were a few costumes for Lyn that were left the same on everyone else and one difficult to obtain costume for everyone. The breast slider being taken out is silly, but I don't think there's actually any NPCs in the game with a breast size above the average mark anyway, and some costumes start to look deformed at larger breast sizes, so I ended up being kind of fine with it in the long run.

Fates I'm torn on. The lack of dual audio and removal of features really bug me. There were several scenes that were wholesale replaced (not just the ones everyone talks about, several of Soleil's or Forrest/Foleo's supports were straight up entirely replaced among others), but with the exception of that "..." scene almost all of them are improvements over the original because Fates/if's support writing is really kinda shitty, and all of these changes were very likely made while in contact with the original developers. Here the costume and "petting" minigame censorship is probably what bugs me the most out of anything, because that's where it feels like Nintendo is going "your pure eyes can't handle boobies" or something weirdly paternalistic like that.

Fatal Frame I haven't checked out much but IIRC the only thing that was different again was another dumb costume thing, right?

 

[RK128]

Bravely Second is being done by Square Enix. The "changes" to the sidequests are mostly due to Square Enix using the second release edition of the game as the base. Bravely Second and the first game both got heavily panned for requiring what amounted to multiple playthroughs of a kind of boring game to play to see all of the content, both in Japan and overseas. I doubt the changes were because bad things could happen in the quests and Square Enix didn't think players could handle that, rather Square Enix received backlash because it would take multiple playthroughs to see the best outcomes. The changes to the costumes are what I would call actual censorship though, and a lot of them are pretty freaking silly.

Xenoblade X's translation to my understanding was mostly done by 8-4 and not in-house by Nintendo, the translation is excellent and the only real changes to content were a few costumes for Lyn that were left the same on everyone else and one difficult to obtain costume for everyone. The breast slider being taken out is silly, but I don't think there's actually any NPCs in the game with a breast size above the average mark anyway, and some costumes start to look deformed at larger breast sizes, so I ended up being kind of fine with it in the long run.

Fates I'm torn on. The lack of dual audio and removal of features really bug me. There were several scenes (not just the ones everyone talks about, several of Soleil's or Forrest/Foleo's supports were straight up entirely replaced among others) that were wholesale replaced, but with the exception of that "..." scene almost all of them are improvements over the original because Fates/if's support writing is really kinda shitty, and all of these changes were very likely made while in contact with the original developers. Here the costume and "petting" minigame censorship is probably what bugs me the most out of anything, because that's where it feels like Nintendo is going "your pure eyes can't handle boobies" or something weirdly paternalistic like that.

Fatal Frame I haven't checked out much but IIRC the only thing that was different again was another dumb costume thing, right?

Thank you for clarifying things regarding Xenoblade X and Bravely Second; didn't know the latter was really being localized by Square (as I though Bravely Default was localized by Nintendo). Nice hearing that Xenoblade X got a great localization !

Fatal Frame is just a costume but from my limited understanding (don't own a Wii U nor the game), the costume change makes the impact of one scene a bit different from the original JP version. I'm indifferent on that as, again, don't have the means to play the game. But people did get upset with that.

 

[foxuzamaki]

I don't think there is a thing to be honest. We might not like it but it is better than no localisation at all.

I also think it is ok if the original developers were made aware of the changes or their company at least came to the decision rather than say, 3rd party localisation team choosing poor words and omitting important dialogue or changing the tone of the games/characters.

If I had made a game and have the opportunity to have it localised for Japanese audience. I would consider alterations for it to be more enjoyable or appropriate. I would do the same if it was going for the West. The tricky part is to not lose your game in the process I guess.

Why did you instantly jump to no localization at all, how is that even a option? It's still gonna be localized, have you guys ever heard of balance?

 

[Cute Dragon Here]

I think I'll only complain when it becomes glaringly obvious to the localized audience that it's messed up - a product that can't stand on its own.

I see no problems with Fates, in other words, and I see that someone pitched that the infamous "..." conversation is probably an accidental placeholder, given that later conversations refer to the missing one.

 

[xevis]

Obviously developers can an do change their own games in response to criticism, and in such cases it can be quite unclear whether there's self-censorship going on, especially when the game is changed before release. But once there's a complete Japanese version, that call gets way easier to make.

Localisation companies are hired by and work on the behalf of developers or rights holders. There are many companies willing to undertake this work and self-publishing is also available and easier than ever. Thus there is no stifling of anyone's freedom of expression and, by extension, no censorship.

Anyway, you're attempting to redefine the meaning of the word. People have consistently used "censorship" to describe egregious removal or changes of content in localizations since basically forever.

A history of pissed-off reactionaries misunderstanding the meaning of a word doesn't suddenly change its meaning. Look, I get it; you are not happy that a company has decided not to sell you a product in a form made available overseas. It's fine to be upset about that you can certain cry foul and call it unfair. What you cannot do is claim you are a victim of censorship. That's patently untrue.

 

[SomeRandomWeirdGuy]

Localisation companies are hired by and work on the behalf of developers or rights holders. There are many companies willing to undertake this work and self-publishing is also available and easier than ever. Thus there is no stifling of anyone's freedom of expression and, by extension, no censorship.



A history of pissed-off reactionaries misunderstanding the meaning of a word doesn't suddenly change its meaning. Look, I get it; you are not happy that a company has decided not to sell you a product in a form made available overseas. It's fine to be upset about that you can certain cry foul and call it unfair. What you cannot do is claim you are a victim of censorship. That's patently untrue.

"The suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security" according to Oxford dictionaries. Seems like censorship to me.

Literally as long as I've been on the internet I've seen this practice referred to as censorship. Only recently did people suddenly start saying it's not censorship because it's not forced by an outside entity. Is changing a gun into a silly hammer contraption in One Piece not censoring the fact that there's a gun? Referring to beer as juice?

There was never an argument about this until people started agreeing with what's been censored.

 

[Platy]

One Piece was not changed by the creators of One Piece.

Both Fire Emblem and Bravely Default were the same company that made the stuff .... Street Fighter 5 was LITERALY the same people who made the stuff

I think the most important factors are:
-There is an already complete version made by the original authors, which is edited by a separate group of people.
-Changes are non-textual. The line can be blurry with textual changes, since the game needs to be translated from a foreign language. But if graphical content is removed, that's a big red flag (see the fundoshi outfit in XCX, or the missing swimsuits in FE:F).
-Changes are made for the purpose of being less offensive and more family-friendly, as opposed to changes made to be less foreign and more understandable. This can be subjective as well. For example, 4kids removing violence from the pokemon anime is widely considered censorship, but changing onigiri to donuts is much more arguable. Generally, if the removed/altered content is violent, sexual, religious, or politically sensitive in nature, it's considered censorship.

How about Wave Race 64 ?

It changed Kawasaki logos for Nintendo logos

How about games like Crazy Taxi and GTA that had their soundtracks butchered on the steam versions ?

 

[flatearthpandas]

I haven't seen anything really go too far since, while I grumble about certain things, I still end up purchasing if I was interested in the game.

But I think the characterization of those who want better translations is pretty unfair. In my opinion, a good localization isn't supposed to trick the target culture into thinking the media originated in their country. It should be like experiencing something with a sci-fi translator. You should understand what they're saying and the language should sound natural but it isn't the end of the world if you need to look up what something is. Ideally, there will be a glossary for that.

To put it another way, I live in Japan. If I was to tell you a story in original English, you would probably still have to look up words. You wouldn't localize my English story into English so that you could pretend I was describing a different country. A good localization read like it was always in English but still in a foreign culture. In my opinion.

 

[cj_iwakura]

Persona 3/4's translation is an interesting case because it doesn't actually preserve honorifics as they are in the Japanese release. The usage of honorifics is changed to the level of politeness that you would expect in an actual English conversation. There's places in the script where stuff like "last name-san" was changed to "first name-kun", or some nicknames were changed to what would be more familiar to American weeaboo audiences at the time (Yukaricchi to "Yuka-tan").

What I don't get about Atlus is their inconsistency. They ONLY do that to Persona games(thank god), but can you imagine if SMTIV or Soul Hackers had that too? Brrr.

 

[xevis]

"The suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security" according to Oxford dictionaries. Seems like censorship to me.

There's no suppression or prohibition. The changes we talking about are not the result of government mandated standards; they are made voluntarily by the rights holders as part of the localisation process. Moreover, there is no single company monopolising access to the video game market and forcing their standards on anyone. There is no censorship.

Literally as long as I've been on the internet I've seen this practice referred to as censorship.

Then you have seen people misunderstand the concept for literally as long as you've been on the Internet.

 

[Negator]

Moreover, there is no single company monopolising access to the video game market and forcing their standards on anyone. There is no censorship.

Yes there is, it's called the ESRB. If your game rating is over a certain threshold, it essentially will not exist in the market.

Publishers censor their games all the time to achieve a specific rating. While we don't see this as an issue in domestically made games because we don't know what was cut to get that rating down to T or M rating, it's an issue in localized games because we have a full release in another territory to compare.

 

[dity]

Yes there is, it's called the ESRB. If your game rating is over a certain threshold, it essentially will not exist in the market.

Publishers censor their games all the time to achieve a specific rating. While we don't see this as an issue in domestically made games because we don't know what was cut to get that rating down to T or M rating, it's an issue in localized games because we have a full release in another territory to compare.

Games like GTA do fine.

 

[xevis]

Yes there is, it's called the ESRB. If your game rating is over a certain threshold, it essentially will not exist in the market.

I think you need to differentiate between the rights of an individual to say something and the right of everyone else to ignore them.

 

[Negator]

I think you need to differentiate between the rights of an individual to say something and the right of everyone else to ignore them.

Regardless of how it was achieved, the results are the same. I see no reason to see it differently.

 

[SolVanderlyn]

Here's one take on it.

Localization is a business. The end goal is to not share one culture's output with another culture, but to extend the shelf-life of a product by moving it to a different market with its own standards and regulations. Therefore, translation "purity", or whatever you want to call it, doesn't really apply. Whatever changes a localization team decides to make, cutting or altering content, are purely business decisions intended to maximize their returns.

Where would it apply, then? Scholarly translations, for one, like the translation of The Ring of Nibelungen to English, or Romance of the Three Kingdoms to Japanese. The entire point of projects like these is to break linguistic barriers in academia. Another example is hobbyist translation and one everyone is likely familiar with is the fansubbing of anime. Both of these types of translation have one and only one goal in mind: to experience and share art from a foreign culture as it is.

This is true for the most part, but it doesn't excuse travesties like the FF14 localization, which has hammy, hamfisted, overly flowery and extremely pretentious pseudo-Shakesperean dialogue that is a purely stylistic choice and has nothing to do with market trends or appealing to a western audience and everything to do with a (failed) attempt at making the setting more fantastical. The straightforward dialogue of the original was fine.

Translating and localizing are just that; a translation of the original dialogue, sometimes reworked for a new audience when necessary. It is not a license to restyle, remove, or otherwise change dialogue because it matches the whim or taste of the localizer. The translators have an artistic obligation to adhere to the spirit of the original product as much as they can. This means that machine translated-esque localizations are equally as bad as FF14 or War of the Lions, because one is not using nuance to recapture the spirit of the original text and thus dulling its impact on its audience, while the other is taking too many liberties and thus changing the intended atmosphere of the source material. It's all about finding the right balance.

 

[Palculator]

No, it isn't. It's reflective of the fact that artists do not create their art in a vacuum but in a society, with other people. Responding to the feelings, concerns and criticisms of others is not censorship. The artist's voice is not being forcefully taken away.

To put it another way: if you are afraid of being shouted down for saying something stupid, perhaps you shouldn't say stupid things. Nobody has a right to say whatever and be free from criticism.

You just said "it's not censorship" and then explained how it's censorship. The loudest people don't get to decide what's acceptable and expect artists to kowtow "decibel opinion." One of the most laughable things I've read on GAF in a while because it assumes people getting their knickers in a twist deserve any more consideration than the ones that don't when there are plenty of examples of the offended being plainly wrong, like back when racist assholes were freaking out at seeing an interracial kiss on TV or outrage over pre-code Hollywood openly depicting homosexuality.

But let's listen to the people who need to "shout down" others over fiction* instead. They sound like reasonable people.

*(stressing fiction because obviously you can't just publish threats or hate speech against people and call it art to get away with it)

 

[Dice//]

Boob slider.

(The inability to customize your self insert character because..?)

Edit: Is this actually censorship?

Boob slider.

(The inability to customize your self insert character because..?)

Edit: Is this actually censorship?

ya don't say.

Anyways I definitely wouldn't want a direct translation of things myself and some of the edits aren't all bad and certainly don't effect the end quality of most (and I mean most) games.

 

[mugwhump]

Localisation companies are hired by and work on the behalf of developers or rights holders. There are many companies willing to undertake this work and self-publishing is also available and easier than ever. Thus there is no stifling of anyone's freedom of expression and, by extension, no censorship.

It doesn't matter how often you insist in bold letters that there's no censorship, because you're only one person. You don't get to dictate language; the majority does. And the majority apparently thinks that this

is censorship, despite the change not being mandated by any government authority.

A history of pissed-off reactionaries misunderstanding the meaning of a word doesn't suddenly change its meaning. Look, I get it; you are not happy that a company has decided not to sell you a product in a form made available overseas. It's fine to be upset about that you can certain cry foul and call it unfair. What you cannot do is claim you are a victim of censorship. That's patently untrue.

Hahahahaha, pissed off reactionaries. Don't call people idiots for calling a spade a spade. This isn't something only pissed-off reactionaries do, it's common usage of the word. Search up any old discussion of crosses being removed from SNES games, or taking blood out of mortal kombat, or changing references to alchohol to soup or some shit. People call it censorship without making a big deal about it, because that's how they see it.

If we were discussing the legal usage of "censorship," or some academic's definition, that would be one thing. But we're not, we're discussing common usage. And there, majority rules. I disliked people using the word "literally" as a synonym for really/extremely instead of as an antonym for figuratively, but that's becoming an accepted meaning of the word. Nothing I can do about it besides accept it.

One Piece was not changed by the creators of One Piece.

Both Fire Emblem and Bravely Default were the same company that made the stuff .... Street Fighter 5 was LITERALY the same people who made the stuff

No difference between one piece and fire emblem as far as I'm concerned. It's the people making the changes who matter, not the company they work for. If Toei owned 4kids, it wouldn't change a thing.

SFV was indeed changed by the original creators; I'd call it self-censorship at most.

How about Wave Race 64 ?

It changed Kawasaki logos for Nintendo logos

How about games like Crazy Taxi and GTA that had their soundtracks butchered on the steam versions ?

Those miss my third observation, that the changes be motivated by the desire to be less offensive or controversial. Localizations can make pointless or unfortunate changes without it being seen as censorship (or at least, I can't find anyone calling those changes censorship after some googling).

 

[xevis]

You just said "it's not censorship" and then explained how it's censorship.

You have some funny ideas about free expression. That right only guarantees you the opportunity to say what you want. It does not shield you from criticism.

But let's listen to the people who need to "shout down" others over fiction* instead. They sound like reasonable people.

I'm not arguing right and wrong. I'm spelling out for you what is and isn't censorship. Someone telling you to shut up as loudly as they can isn't censorship. On the other hand someone stopping you from expressing your opinion (e.g. by threatening you with physical violence or otherwise preventing you from having your say) is censorship.

Hahahahaha, pissed off reactionaries. Don't call people idiots for calling a spade a spade. This isn't something only pissed-off reactionaries do, it's common usage of the word. Search up any old discussion of crosses being removed from SNES games, or taking blood out of mortal kombat, or changing references to alchohol to soup or some shit. People call it censorship without making a big deal about it, because that's how they see it.

I get that. But it's wrong. Words mean things and this one hasn't changed its meaning yet. At least, not according to my dictionary (unlike the word "literally", btw, which has a new entry reflecting is recent abusage). More than that though, it's pretty fucking hard for me to take seriously any argument about localisation changes when the opening volley is invariably an inappropriate cry of "censorship!" over what amounts to anime boobies or the non-translation of some minor bit of cultural specific text that borders on oriental fetishisation.

 

[Kanhir]

But do you really think Nintendo would have passed on xenoblade if they'd been forced to keep the breast slider or fundoshi outfit, and would have skipped fire emblem if they'd had to include the face-rubbing or swimsuits? I doubt it extremely. Those things wouldn't have even bumped the ratings up from T if the ESRB's past history is anything to go by.

The ESRB is not the only stakeholder in the world. Europe has very strict child pornography laws, and unlike Japan, these also cover artistic depictions of children. If an underage person is being shown in a sexualised manner, it won't just get a bad rating - it'll be breaking the law. It's also pretty conservatively enforced - if the character looks underage, that's what matters, so changing the age doesn't cut it.

So, yes, Nintendo would likely have passed on Xenoblade if they'd been forced to keep the problematic aspects. No choice in the matter.

(See also the sexy costumes in Fatal Frame and Bravely Default.)

 

[Fantastapotamus]

Di I enjoy the dialoge? If yes, then it doesn't matter to me whether it qas the same in a vetsion I'm never going to see.
That's really were it starts and ends for me.

As for "sexy" costumes: Fuck them. I don't give a shit. If you do, that sucks for you and you have every right to complain about it but I really couldn't care less about studip shit like "bikini outfits" which would have made me cringe anyway.

Edit: Oh, also this is certainly not censorship. Geez.

 

[Mephala]

Why did you instantly jump to no localization at all, how is that even a option? It's still gonna be localized, have you guys ever heard of balance?

That is my point as well. I guess I just didn't get it through very well. I think it is balanced. I think there is room for the localisation team to change things as they see fit even if we don't agree with all of them as the consumer. At some point you need to consider if the localisation is so bad that it effects the final product to the point where it is unenjoyable. I don't think FE is at that point.

 

[Zolbrod]

How about Wave Race 64 ?

It changed Kawasaki logos for Nintendo logos

How about games like Crazy Taxi and GTA that had their soundtracks butchered on the steam versions ?

Licensing issues, I would assume.

 

[dity]

It doesn't matter how often you insist in bold letters that there's no censorship, because you're only one person. You don't get to dictate language; the majority does. And the majority apparently thinks that this

is censorship, despite the change not being mandated by any government authority.

I'm pretty sure 4kids did what they had to do to not step on the FCC's toes. A gun in a children's show during daylight hours would have had 4kids and the broadcaster in tough shit.

Like, you know what the FCC is right?

 

[TatteredHat]

Rewrites of dialogue that completely change or remove the context of the scene, and anything beyond that.

 

[mugwhump]

I get that. But it's wrong.

It is, is it? Seems to me we've got 2 different approaches here. I'm being descriptive, and trying to describe how I see people actually using the word. You're being prescriptive, and trying to impose a definition you see as correct. Dictionaries actually take the former approach. It can take them a bit to catch up with current usage, but even now you don't have the evidence to flat-out say it's wrong.

Words mean things and this one hasn't changed its meaning yet. At least, not according to my dictionary (unlike the word "literally", btw, which has a new entry reflecting is recent abusage).

It hasn't? You're way too sure of yourself when even the dictionaries disagree with each other.

censor verb [T] uk /ˈsen.sər/ us /ˈsen.sɚ/
› to ​remove anything ​offensive from ​books, ​films, etc., or to ​remove ​parts ​considered ​unsuitable from ​private ​letters, ​especially ​ones ​sent during ​war or from a ​prison:

censor verb [with object]
Examine (a book, film, etc.) officially and suppress unacceptable parts of it:

Censorship is a word of many meanings. In its broadest sense it refers to suppression of information, ideas, or artistic expression by anyone, whether government officials, church authorities, private pressure groups, or speakers, writers, and artists themselves. It may take place at any point in time, whether before an utterance occurs, prior to its widespread circulation, or by punishment of communicators after dissemination of their messages, so as to deter others from like expression. In its narrower, more legalistic sense, censorship means only the prevention by official government action of the circulation of messages already produced. Thus writers who "censor" themselves before putting words on paper, for fear of failing to sell their work, are not engaging in censorship in this narrower sense, nor are those who boycott sponsors of disliked television shows.

Censorship: supervision and control of the information and ideas circulated within a society. In modern times, censorship refers to the examination of media including books, periodicals, plays, motion pictures, and television and radio programs for the purpose of altering or suppressing parts thought to be offensive. The offensive material may be considered immoral or obscene, heretical or blasphemous, seditious or treasonable, or injurious to the national security.

Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication or other information which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, politically incorrect or inconvenient as determined by governments, media outlets, authorities or other groups or institutions.[1]

Governments, private organizations and individuals may engage in censorship. When an individual such as an author or other creator engages in censorship of their own works or speech, it is called self-censorship. Censorship may be direct or it may be indirect, in which case it is called soft censorship.

To "censor" is to review something and to choose to remove or hide parts of it that are considered unacceptable. Censorship is the name for the process or idea of keeping things like obscene word or graphic images from an audience. There is also such a thing as self-censorship, which is when you refrain from saying certain things — or possibly re-wording them — depending on who is listening.

a person who examines books, movies, letters, etc., and removes things that are considered to be offensive, immoral, harmful to society, etc.

As you can see, whether government involvement is necessary for censorship is controversial. It seems that used to be a more common part of the definition in the past. But current common usage appears to be changing that. And when more dictionaries update in the future, I don't think the updated definition will be to your liking.

More than that though, it's pretty fucking hard for me to take seriously any argument about localisation changes when the opening volley is invariably an inappropriate cry of "censorship!" over what amounts to anime boobies or the non-translation of some minor bit of cultural specific text that borders on oriental fetishisation.

Yes, yes, everyone who disagrees with you is a big dumb crybaby pervert. Do they smell bad too? I bet they do.

 

[UrbanRats]

I find most adaptations like these either lame or patronizing.
Translating a language isn't as straight forward as dropping lines into Google translate, for sure, and that requires localization teams to put in some creativity, in adapting the text and what is being said; however broader "cultural" adaptations are a big no-no for me, no matter how shitty or weird you think the original text was.
If you can't handle a different, even contrasting culture, don't consume foreign media, but these sort of adaptations are small minded and pathetic.

That said, videogames are aimed at a younger audience usually, and they are a business long before they are a work of art, so these sort of patronizing decisions make sense for it, they just show a fundamental lack of confidence in games as art.
I don't think people would react in the same way, if a major work of literature received the same treatment (were they aware of it, of course).
I consume foreign art to (among other things) broaden my mind and assimilate different cultures and way of thinking than mine, I don't want someone else to decide what I can and can't handle and process for myself, with my little brain.
This is why I find some localization choices outright offensive, even if done with good intentions, even if done by the internal editing team themselves.


Also, wasting time to argue whether the definition of "censorship" does or doesn't apply is a bit pointless, like most semantics arguments. Just my 2 cents.

 

[GamerJM]

I'm not really sure. I'd probably consider what they did with the SNES version of Final Fantasy IV going too far if that game released today, but at the same time I grew up playing that version and find the localization changes endearing, and now I have sort of a weird fondness for bad 90s localizations. So I dunno, but I'd say something around that level, i.e. changing the actual gameplay of the game in a significant way and having really poorly written text.

Also I will say that it bothers me if a game has a really bad dub and no option for Japanese VAs (or just not having such bad voice acting in the first place) if the Japanese voice acting wasn't really bad. I'm not a weeaboo who thinks that Japanese voice actors are always better than English voice actors all of the time but I'm specifically thinking of something like Arc Rise Fantasia here where the English voice acting is excruciatingly poor.

 

[HGH]

Why did you instantly jump to no localization at all, how is that even a option? It's still gonna be localized, have you guys ever heard of balance?

People seem to only want to deal with black and whites. Especially those "Go learn Japanese!" and "It's not censorship!" people.

Apparently, criticizing a localization and its elements means that you don't want a localization at all. How dare someone have issues with how certain elements are handled?! Clearly it's all or nothing with 0 in-between solutions, and any feedback is actually just "entitled gamers".
It's funny the lengths people will go to to avoid compromises.
Oh avatar shaming, nice, feels like 2013 again.

 

[xevis]

As you can see, whether government involvement is necessary for censorship is controversial. It seems that used to be a more common part of the definition in the past. But current common usage appears to be changing that. And when more dictionaries update in the future, I don't think the updated definition will be to your liking.

The key point I'm trying (obviously failing) to make is that censorship requires change by force. That's not happening here. What we have is an artistic rights holder applying their best judgement to adapt a work to a new audience. It's asinine to suggest such a change is censorship, even if your first instinct is to reach for that word.

Yes, yes, everyone who disagrees with you is a big dumb crybaby pervert. Do they smell bad too? I bet they do.

D'awww, an ad hominem! Aren't you clever!

 

[mugwhump]

The key point I'm trying (obviously failing) to make is that censorship requires change by force. That's not happening here. What we have is an artistic rights holder applying their best judgement to adapt a work to a new audience. It's asinine to suggest such a change is censorship, even if your first instinct is to reach for that word.

You're failing because your evidence is lacking. What happened to your appeal to the dictionary? Only Oxford's definition of censorship suggests that outside force is required.

And you said on the previous page that censoring yourself isn't censorship. What about all these dictionary entries for self-censorship?
Collins
Cambridge
MacMillan
Oxford

I myself would use censorship rather than self-censorship to describe the changes I've been discussing, as I don't consider NoA to be the author (somewhat controversial, I admit), and certainly not some western schmuck who happened to buy the rights. But surely you'll at least admit that self-censorship is an applicable term here?

D'awww, an ad hominem! Aren't you clever!

Yes, I called out your ad-hom. It was dumb. If you know what it is, don't do it in the first place.

The ESRB is not the only stakeholder in the world. Europe has very strict child pornography laws, and unlike Japan, these also cover artistic depictions of children. If an underage person is being shown in a sexualised manner, it won't just get a bad rating - it'll be breaking the law. It's also pretty conservatively enforced - if the character looks underage, that's what matters, so changing the age doesn't cut it.

So, yes, Nintendo would likely have passed on Xenoblade if they'd been forced to keep the problematic aspects. No choice in the matter.

(See also the sexy costumes in Fatal Frame and Bravely Default.)

1) Why are you talking about Lin's costume changes when I specifically only mentioned the fundoshi outfit and the removal of the breast slider? Those are not illegal anywhere.
2) I'm skeptical that xenoblade's lin costumes would have gotten it banned in any European country, seeing as she's not actually nude in any of them. Can you name an example of this kind of outfit getting banned anywhere?
3) The characters in Fatal Frame are 19 and 17; not a strong example of child pornography. The characters in Bravely Default were changed from 15 to 18, and the costumes weren't even as risque as XCX or FF.
4) That's Europe. They already make different versions for EU and NA, and censorship in one doesn't mandate censorship in the other.

I'm pretty sure 4kids did what they had to do to not step on the FCC's toes. A gun in a children's show during daylight hours would have had 4kids and the broadcaster in tough shit.

Like, you know what the FCC is right?

Yes. You know that their guidelines only actually prohibit profanity and sexual/excretory content, right?
https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/obscene-indecent-and-profane-broadcasts
Regardless, 4kids' changes to One Piece went way, way beyond anything that would be required by the FCC.

 

[antennaehead]

To summarize my thought on the matter:
1. Whether the localization is censorship or not is up to the (endless) debate, and mostly depends on your definition of censorship.
2. Yes, translation is a complicated process and some things are bound to be lost in translation.
3. Yes, as far as localization / editing goes, the product owner has its reasons for it. Those reasons are not necessarily malicious, they probably just want to generate more sales in one way or another.
4. Yes, the product owners (be it Nintendo, Square Enix or somebody else) have all the rights in the world to do whatever they want with the product in question. It's their product after all.
5. No, the fact that they could do whatever they want with their product doesn't mean that you should be okay with it. You could, but you're not necessarily should.
6. Yes - and this is a very simple notion and I'm surprised some are unable to grasp it - some people want to get a translated product that is as close to the original as possible - without cuts, without edits, without localized names or jokes and so on.
7. And finally - yes, if you are not happy with translation / localization - by all means you should voice your discontent. Customer feedback is important and there is a chance that the product owner will listen to you and change its approach to localization. Just keep it civil.

 

[dity]

Yes. You know that their guidelines only actually prohibit profanity and sexual/excretory content, right?
https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/obscene-indecent-and-profane-broadcasts
Regardless, 4kids' changes to One Piece went way, way beyond anything that would be required by the FCC.

Threatening a child with a gun is pretty profane. The language is one thing, but the context of a gun held to a child's head would be a broadcast disaster. There's a reason anime with that sort of stuff in it is kept to late night. I don't even think One Piece airs uncut in the USA to this day, although I'm not 100%.

You may see is as "way, way beyond" but anyone can record that footage and complain.