Top Rated Comment

i think the difference between this and those you mentioned is that people take this as a personal attack on culture. That we as a society cannot handle the idea of women in scantily clad clothing and that we don't deserve Atlus' full vision of the game.

Thu May 05 16 09:56pm
(Updated 1 time)

So folks will throw a fit over clothes AGAIN yet to this day barely anyone has made even a peaceful protest over actual problems like the removal of the Battle frontier in ORAS , the SF Zero controls, or the Zelda 2017 delay. Priorities in 2016 folks.

EDIT: Though after watching the video in full I will admit the hat looks pretty stupid. Still is a rather childish thing to get worked up about though.

i think the difference between this and those you mentioned is that people take this as a personal attack on culture. That we as a society cannot handle the idea of women in scantily clad clothing and that we don't deserve Atlus' full vision of the game.

psi wind
Thu May 05 16 11:42pm
Rating: 6

Do you honestly think that the characters in this game who are "scantly" clothed are just for fanservice? No, the whole message and plot of this game revolves around the idol industry in Japan and how screwed up it can be. Gravure shots are part of the Idol industry for example, so changing those images in that dungeon lessens the impact of the games message. Then there's the fact that the changes are inconsistent as they don't show up in cutscenes but do in battles. And THEN Nintendo actually had to get the JP VAs to literally redo certain lines that they REWROTE COMPLETELY such as Tsubasa's introduction scene or them mentioning their age. These changes, in moderation, are generally something I can deal with, but with each new localization from Nintendo, more and more edits are done to the point that you aren't getting the original version and are literally acting like 4kids, but now people are totally okay with it. It never was "muh clothes". It's about how MUCH is done and changed and where. If it was just some outfit changes like Tsubasa's idol outfit, that's okay. When you literally change the meaning and message from the original product though, that crosses the line.

Fri May 06 16 06:12am
Rating: 2

Do you honestly think that the characters in this game who are "scantly" clothed are just for fanservice?
If anything, it appears he's saying the exact opposite of this. He's saying that other people will perceive this as just fanservice and that Nintendo/Atlus thinks people can't handle that, even though there's a good reason to have this.

Fri May 06 16 12:49am
Rating: 1

You mean "Atlus plus the publisher's full vision of the game." Because once you start paying the bills you get a say in what vision is presented. You're buying a say, and that's why localization isn't censorship any more than making decisions during development is censorship.

Thu May 05 16 10:30pm
Rating: 1

Because a game is what a game is... unless it's been censored, then it is what it ain't.

Erm... I hope that made sense.

I like Star Fox's controls. If an open-world game needs to be delayed, let them. We don't want to waste time playing a huge game that's a bore. Never heard of the ORAS issue, but I don't really pick up Pokemon games anymore because they've been too samey.

Thu May 05 16 10:49pm
Rating: 4

1. Removal of content sucks, period. However, there's no solid PROOF that the Battle Frontier was going to be in ORAS. Yes, there are references to it, but that still doesn't prove GAME FREAK planned to include it. Even so, that isn't a REGIONAL difference. If the Battle Frontier was in the Japanese version of ORAS, and then removed from the NA/EU releases, then I can assure you a lot of people would be upset.

2. Star Fox Zero's controls are FINE.

3. A delay just means we'll get it later, not never. If Nintendo pulled "a Konami" and completely canceled the new Zelda (like Konami did with Silent Hills), then I could understand people being upset (I know I would be). Or, if they canceled the Wii U version and only released it on NX, I could understand people being upset about that.

The difference between the upset with censorship (I don't care whether or not you think it's censorship, that's a moot point and beside the issue) of FE Fates, TMS#FE, etc. and the lack of Battle Frontier in ORAS is they spent extra development time to REMOVE content that was ALREADY THERE. Whereas the inclusion of Battle Frontier in ORAS would require extra development time to ADD something that ISN'T CURRENTLY PART OF THE GAMES.

If you're complacent with receiving a neutered product, and rather complain about things that weren't there in the first place, then I think it's YOU whose priorities are wrong.

I went about my daily business and didn't even remember about the whole ordeal. It took to notifications for me to even remember all about these edits and my opinion on them, which I still stand by, so I'll reply to your replies.

1: It's a remake of a game that already exists. Other remakes change their stories or levels all the time, but at the very least they keep what makes the original games fun intact or improve upon them. If flat-out removing a major feature of the originals isn't a form of self-censorship (which I'll explain why later using their own reasoning)

2: Maybe for folks who force themselves to learn them, but they aren't in the grand scheme of things. Sin and Punishment 2 practically supported every controller on the entire Wii, so what stops SF0 from supporting the Pro Controller or Classic Controller along with the Gamepad? Heck, even Off-TV play would have been nice.

3: Tell that to many other delayed games that ended up poor in the end even after years of waiting. For all we know with Zelda Wii U/NX's delay, outside of making the NX lineup solid (THAT of which I'm fine with as it NEEDS a good lineup, but the Wii U version shouldn't suffer because of it.), there's no good reason for why the Wii U Version can't be released AT LEAST during the 30th anniversary, even if it had to go to January 2017 to do so. It's an NX Marketing ploy, nothing more.

4: Sure, that's one way to look at it, but then again, when ORAS was being developed, practically EVERY hardcore fan at least assumed it would be included based on past track records with prior remakes like HGSS or FRLG. They had MONTHS to at least state it wasn't happening to help the consumers decide, but they kept it a secret until AFTER launch and even prevented reviewers from mentioning that it was removed until after the launch. If that isn't fishy, I don't know what is. The fact that a week later one of the staff members admitted that it was removed on purpose SOLELY because of the casual gaming market proves that they pretty much just took the lazy way out and tried their hardest to do a cover up hoping the folks shouting Hoenn Confirmed would blindly buy it. And they did, and yet when folks finally reached that part in the game, very few seemed to realize the big mistake the developers made, either due to folks losing interest in the main story or just because they heard from someone else and stopped caring.

Again, to me having a feature from a REMAKE completely scrapped with no new replacement , costing potential players bonus hours of actual gameplay is self-censorship in itself, and I could even argue that the Game Corner being removed counts as censorship as well, but that mostly has to do with Europe's overly strict laws so I can't really use that as an example since there's a big legal reason for it.

These clothing edits on the other hand? They are literally visual edits. No hours of gameplay are going to be lost just from editing clothes, even if they replace it with odd things like a baseball cap that looks silly. Yet there's a movement group on twitter dedicated to practically boycotting the game and playing the blame game. (then some members claiming "oh its awareness NOT a boycott" when other members flat-out say it is, meaning there's no organization at all) I've been super hyped for the game since last April, and I have my eye on this game like a hawk. If I see even the slightest major edit you can bet I'll be on board voicing my sadness, but even then I'll refrain from going over the top.

I thought that you meant this comment in an ironic way at first...because people complained like crazy about those things o_O
None of which I personally found problematic D:

Fri May 06 16 12:48am
Rating: 1

Because clothing options or face petting or whatever is in one region's version of the game, yet removed from others for arbitrary reasons. The things you listed where never made available in any of the other region versions of the games (JAP, NTSC, EUR).Imagine if Italy didn't allow games with Mario in it because their media made a big fuss that it's offensive to Italians. It's an "I don't like it so no one can have it" mentality, when those people weren't going to buy it in the first place.

I'm not really interested in this game, and clothing options are usually just for fun so it's not something crucial to the game being lost, but your comparison doesn't hold up, and to still stupid to remove something when it's intact in another country. There's no legitimate reason.

That's gonna be a matter of opinion.

I think if video games as an art form. I also consider myself an artist. To me this is censorship of art. That's inexcusable to me in every way. This might just be a goofy little scene in the grand scope of the game, but cover up Mona Lisa's smile and you get a completely different piece.

But like I said it's a matter of opinion

I don't mind this much. It may suck that it was changed, but I understand why and I am fine with it. People seem to enjoy blowing these things way out of proportion.

What is this game anyway? Everytime I see a post for it, it's just half naked girls.

This is why I import from Japan, you don't lose content and/or have it changed for the stupid crossed arm pose or get stupid hats. This is why my personal take on video games and programming has me set with the goal of working for a Japan based gaming company with more cultural freedom. This is my personal view, you may have another, so there is no need to contradict my personal views. You have yours, I have mine. Simple.

Thu May 05 16 11:10pm
Rating: 2

Curious that you associate "more cultural freedom" with a Japanese corporation.

Thu May 05 16 11:47pm
Rating: 1

I'm offended by the way she has that hat on seriously almost makes me want to cancel my pre order I'm from the era from when people wore their hat the right way with the bill slightly curved

Fri May 06 16 12:15am
Rating: 1 (Updated 2 times)

Oh that's the first Video of the hilarious changes, he even uploaded a second one where the cleavage of a Boss is covered by mist in our Version.

Well, let's focus on this Video here:

1. Of course the new Outfit looks terrible. She now looks like a boy with an "I was in Youth Prison for 2 Month" Tattoo on her cheek. That was most likely done by Atlus because they were so annoyed by Nintendos strict rules they thought: "Let's raise the Nuts-Level to 10.

2. Like you already figured, the whole Story of this Dungeon in the Game doesen't make sense anymore due to this edits. It's actually plain stupid now and ridiculous.

3. Atlus wont make these changes for free. How much does it cost to fully edit this Game with so many changes? Money, Nintendo could have spend on releasing the Game in at least 5 popular languages for the subtitles.

Disgusting changes. Glad Atlus announced yesterday the release date for Persona 5 in Japan. So a Western release will follow most likely quick, at least in the US. Better save the money for that instead of supporting Nintendos lunacy. And from this point on, it will most likely get even more hilarious on upcoming Games.

Fri May 06 16 12:34am
Rating: 1

I think someone needs to look up what "censored" actually means. Because this channel certainly doesn't.

Fri May 06 16 12:43am
Rating: 5

Oh the stories I could tell you--horror stories or humorous tales, depending on your point of view--about the reactions I've gotten in the last year every I try to get people to reserve the word "censorship" for actual censorship. For most people it is equivalent to "changes I don't like for reasons I don't like," much in the way people say "open-minded" when they really mean "agrees with me."

I'd be nice if more people who actually work at these companies would grow some spines and speak out against these kinds of unnecessary changes. Far too many of them must either actively advocate for these changes or don't care enough about the integrity of their own games to voice any concerns. I find that extremely sad.

Fri May 06 16 01:09am
(Updated 1 time)

Far too many of them must either actively advocate for these changes or don't care enough about the integrity of their own games to voice any concerns.

Maybe they just don't see it as a problem, perhaps? Differences in cultural views mean censorship is an inevitability everywhere--even outside the USA--so why get worked up over it? We censor clothing, they censor violence... maybe they just accept that it's the nature of the world and move on with their lives?

If they really don't see censorship as a problem that's even more troubling!

Fri May 06 16 12:54am
Rating: 1 (Updated 2 times)

Yet no one in the west even notices when a game localized for Japan has cut content... >_>

In defense of the [overly vocal] anti-censorship/localization camp, just because they censor their stuff doesn't mean we have to follow suit.

That said, though, folks do need to learn to pick their battles and find SOME middle ground. Not every piece of localization needs to be met with boycotting a game or disowning a company.

Man, I wish the anti-censorship folks [of the extreme end] would just start their own localization firm, so they can have all the scantly clad underage girls, boob sliders, rubbing mini-games, exaggerated breast physics, and purely untouched, unaltered translations they want. Only to free the rest of us from their constant bemoaning any time some foreign game makes it stateside...

Fri May 06 16 02:08am
Rating: 1

Or companies could just stop censoring their own games. That would be a novel concept!

That's easy to say, being on the consumer end, not having to fit the bill or take PR risks for localization. Companies do make odd choices for the weirdest reasons, but the most stake consumers have is whether or not they buy the game. It's the companies that will have to deal with the public reception depending on who catches wind (for better or for worse).

That's why I say that if folks believe in the cause and want badly enough, they should start their own localization/publishing firm. Show Nintendo and every other "spineless" dev/publisher how it's done and how there's nothing to be afraid of. If there's no backlash or effected sales due to whatever controversy of the week there is, then other companies will follow suit. If the venture crashes and burns... well then we'll all have learned a valuable lesson.

When those above choose to ignore you, lead by example. Quite a novel concept, I'm sure!

Fri May 06 16 06:36am
Rating: 1

That's why I say that if folks believe in the cause and want badly enough, they should start their own localization/publishing firm. Show Nintendo and every other "spineless" dev/publisher how it's done and how there's nothing to be afraid of. If there's no backlash or effected sales due to whatever controversy of the week there is, then other companies will follow suit. If the venture crashes and burns... well then we'll all have learned a valuable lesson.
That's not even easier said than done, that's just downright impossible. Even if we had the funds to start up our own company like that, the likes of Nintendo wouldn't ever let our company localize their games exactly because we don't cut or change content.
The publishers who believe you shouldn't cut/change content already have their own localization teams who keep that integrity intact. The publishers who believe it's okay to cut/change content -- the ones you tell us to convince -- would only pick localization teams who do exactly that

So, I didn't bother watching the video, 'cause I'm honestly just gonna wait for the game to be released here before I see most/any of it.

But that said, I'm still amazed people get so worked up over "censorship". Based on the comments, it might change some of the context of some of the dungeons, but along with these changes, I'm sure they've altered the script enough for it to make sense.

Folks really need to stop acting like these sorts of changes are something new. We've gotten such changes for DECADES in localized games, and the general public didn't know or care, and some of the games that even got hit with many graphical and script edits, like Earthbound, are regarded as classics. Overall, the feel of the game was not changed, it was aesthetically altered, and the script was changed enough to make sense to Western audiences.

My point here is, basically, it's not a new practice, and it ultimately doesn't "hurt" nearly as much as people make it out to be. Even other games like Fire Emblem Fates, where we supposedly had "major censorship", were still great and weren't really harmed by these changes.

In the end, though... the only change to this game I don't like is the fact that it isn't really Shin Megami Tensei x Fire Emblem anymore. It basically only inherited a variation of the press-turn system from SMT, and the basic concept is close to Persona, but with Fire Emblem characters instead of religion/culture based demons.

Somebody give this user a medal.

Folks really need to stop acting like these sorts of changes are something new.
I really haven't seen anyone say it's something new. I only see people saying it isn't new.

My point here is, basically, it's not a new practice
But it is something that has become more common knowledge, due to how information can now spread over the internet. Just because it has happened for a long time without our knowing doesn't make it okay now that we know of it. I'm sure there are a lot of horrible things happening all over the world that I don't know of... But the moment I know of it, I think I'm right in being upset over it.
Disclaimer: I am not saying these changes are equally bad as "horrible things happening all over the world". I merely used it as an example that shows that it's not bad to get upset over something old if it's something you learned of just now

and it ultimately doesn't "hurt" nearly as much as people make it out to be
Like before, I haven't really seen that many people say it hurts a lot of people. They are mostly 'battling' (strong word, but at the moment I can't find a better one) for themselves and other like-minded people

Quite frankly you did a much better job at explaining this whole mess than I did. Got the point across much better on why this shouldn't be so overblown.

While I understand annoyances to things like censoreship, I feel there is something here when things like this gets more attention than Nintendo's E3 plans.

In the end, it is just a skimpy outfit getting changed. Which is understandable that people get annoyed at. Not saying it is a 'good' thing. But, I feel like it gets TOO much attention, in the wrong way. Suddenly, every censore-related Topic on the internet gets gigantic. :/

Censorship sigh... Everyone has to vote with their wallets, since thats the only way your voice will get the higher ups... I for one I am buying the limited edition!!

Actually, looks like she's setting a pretty good example; a perfect date (to her) merits a special outfit, not exposing more skin.

Whatever happened to unlocking extra gear from side quest or getting them from end game completion? I guess those days are long gone. But in the end Its a good thing that Nin didn't invent Star Wars (Slowly grabs a copy Star Wars VI & starts to watch it)...

evan stoopeeder
Fri May 06 16 02:53am
Rating: 1 (Updated 1 time)

Any girls discussing in this thread? No? Thought so. Guys you don't get the problem. Sexualisation (of the female characters only, incidentally). Of underage characters. In a game that is clearly aimed at kids / teenagers.

Game looks horrible, by the way.

Coming from a girl: Game is not aimed at Kids (gosh) and the age of the Characters is raised to 18. And you will clearly see harder stuff when you visit a public bath.

I'm not a prude, far from it actually. It's all about context. Sexual freedom, nude sauna and bathing all the way - hey, I'm european. But casting shows for minors are problematic anyway, and what could justify zooming onto her breasts and crotch in underwear?
"Raising the age to 18" is laughable, when they look like 14. And why don't the boys strip to their underwear?

To repeat, I'm not prudish. I'm ok with porn, but call it what it is, and don't sneak it into family entertainment - it's creepy. By the way, how is that game not aimed at kids / teenagers? And single middle-aged men, of course?

And why don't the boys strip to their underwear?
I'm quite sure I've seen the guys in swimwear and in nude Onsen in this game...

Funny thing is, the characters in Tokyo Mirage Sessions are still showing more skin than the characters in Persona 5. Looks like Atlus and Sony preemptively censored the entirety of p5 and lampshaded it with messy red and black lines flying around the screen as if to jingle some keys in front of a potentially crying baby who just learned their first word, "censorship".

You watched the new Persona 5 Trailer?

Add one more reason to the ever growing list, to why people are losing respect for NoA.

I'll never play Earthbound again. It's MY right as a consumer to see the Red Cross on the hospital, AS IT WAS ORIGINALLY INTENDED!!!! The game is RUINED

That was copyright violation, though. Big difference.

It wasn't exactly a "violation", it was also removed for the potential religious interpretation, not to mention the fact that the symbol of a red cross is actually offensive in some cultures.

it was also removed for the potential religious interpretation
I don't think I've seen anyone look at the red cross and think "Hm. This is religious". Everyone knows what the red cross is, and it doesn't even really look like any religious cross

In the middle east, they do not use the red cross, but a crescent instead, because of the connotations of the cross.

Though it may not have had any involvement in the removal here. Who knows?

Oh! Yeah, I did know that they used a crescent over there, but I never knew it was because of religious reasons. Huh, the more you know.

I blame it on the years I used to watch the History Channel, before it became "Ancient Aliens and Hitler, The Channel". Actually used to be quite informative. :P


Today's VIP

zeolic's avatar
Joined: September 2017

Social Services

Want to join this discussion?

You should like, totally log in or sign up!