-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Nintendo doesn't plan on censoring video games, will only rely on 3rd-party rating boards
- Thread starter Deleted member 10737
- Start date
- Status
User Banned (1 Month): Rationalizing the Sexualized Depictions of Minors
This has been the biggest problem about Sony's policy, though. The fact that they told devs to not admit there was a censorship policy was practically draconian.
Don't. Buy. Them. Vote with your wallet. If people want to buy them regardless of the stigma attached to it as you say, then clearly there's enough money in it to keep going as long as these games have been made. It is ABSURD to have somebody over the ratings board say otherwise and there's not a single excuse for it.
Also, considering we're talking about an UNDEFINED AMBIGUOUS CENSORSHIP POLICY, I would think that's up for scrutiny until foundations are set.
And no, "Think of the children" is not a fucking justification. Lay out the guidelines, drop the stupid mandatory English communication between devs and Sony California, and stop telling devs that they can't say their games were censored. That shit is not okay.
I don't buy them. Other do.
This isn't some fucking "think of the children" bullshit. It is a real issue and one that is being normalized. Fuck that shit, if this is what needs to be done to stop this shit from being released then I am all for it.
Pretty disappointing coming from Nintendo. Underage sexualization has been an issue in Japanese media for a very long time, but there's no real incentive for anyone to change it. However, the industry as a whole needs to step up and not just one platformer holder, because then it becomes ineffectual. It's really disappointing that the media is framing it as "anti-censorship" rather than "pro-lolicon" (though not unexpected) because that's the image that would be needed to get Nintendo to shift.
There's some other frustrating elements of this too. Mary Skelter is one of those games that's pretty sleazy but actually fairly decent, but for the sequel, rather than toning it down for the PS4, they just didn't bother to localize that version and only stuck it on the Switch. I totally would've bought a cleaned up version, but considering Idea Factory's target audience I'm probably in the minority.
Anyway, since people fundamentally STILL DON'T UNDERSTAND how these things, Sony doesn't initially go through pre-release games with a checklist, it's up to the third party dev/publisher to review Sony's rules first and figure out what's appropriate and what isn't. This seems to have been a sticking point with something like DmC5, where Capcom erred too heavily on the side of caution, realized post-release that it was actually A-OK, and patched it out. But that's also why you have things that aren't necessarily underage sexualization getting some tweaks because they need to play it safe rather than risk a content rejection and then wasting time/money for a resubmission.
There's some other frustrating elements of this too. Mary Skelter is one of those games that's pretty sleazy but actually fairly decent, but for the sequel, rather than toning it down for the PS4, they just didn't bother to localize that version and only stuck it on the Switch. I totally would've bought a cleaned up version, but considering Idea Factory's target audience I'm probably in the minority.
Anyway, since people fundamentally STILL DON'T UNDERSTAND how these things, Sony doesn't initially go through pre-release games with a checklist, it's up to the third party dev/publisher to review Sony's rules first and figure out what's appropriate and what isn't. This seems to have been a sticking point with something like DmC5, where Capcom erred too heavily on the side of caution, realized post-release that it was actually A-OK, and patched it out. But that's also why you have things that aren't necessarily underage sexualization getting some tweaks because they need to play it safe rather than risk a content rejection and then wasting time/money for a resubmission.
Mind telling me what games got affected by this crack down other than games promoting sexualized children? I can only think of one game that had a weird censorship which is DMC5 but I doubt it was done because Sony asked for it to be done.
I agree Sony should clarify their rules but at the very least something is being done against these games. I can't say the same for other platforms. If it means no more pedo content then I am fine with these rules, especially when many people seem to want this type of content which normalizes it.
That's the opposite of what's happening. Sony themselves confirmed that there isn't any guidelines.
Developers have to submit their games(in English regardless of whether it's a JP only release) and then Sony tells them if they need to change anything, and what they need to change can be a moving target.
If Sony actually had a detailed policy they provided to publishers there would be a lot less controversy.
Fucking stupid we keep thinking that not sexualizing teenage girls because it's creepy/wrong/pedophilia = censorship.
Sony's not actually dealing with the problem though. They're just breeding ill will with smaller devs and pubs for the trouble and the objectionable content is largely getting through anyway.
They didn't localize the PS4 version of MS2 because the Chinese version was censored in a patch (removed the rubbing minigame) and it broke the game and introduced problems. The Switch version is being localized uncensored.
This is no big deal. And FORGET about underage sexualization, ESRB has to make that AO, hands down. Nintendo doesn't need to be the judge of these for the time being. Last thing they want is a third party dev being scared off or something because of some extra non ESRB hurdle to jump through. Otherwise though, censorship of content is something that I thought would be a thing of the past after the 4Kids era. So unnecessary.
OP
OP
the pedo content is still there, there's just some slight fog or light ray covering some parts of it in some games. these rules aren't stopping the content from existing. if sony actually had a policy of denying these games from being published on their platforms, then that would have been something you could respect.
lmao th
The pedo content is still there! Why do people keep repeating this when it's clearly not the case? You can go on PSN right now and buy pretty much any Neptunia or Senran Kagura game if you wanted to.
The pedo content is still there! Why do people keep repeating this when it's clearly not the case? You can go on PSN right now and buy pretty much any Neptunia or Senran Kagura game if you wanted to.
Isn't this a contradiction though? If Sony is rejecting games then obviously there are guidelines.
Whether they're straightforward or not is usually how these things go, but when you start having arguments about what levels of child sexulization or sexual abuse is acceptable then you've lost the plot.
There have been public comments about them being aware that somethings acceptable in Japan are not acceptable internationally and trying to make them consistent which is how this whole thing started.
The PS4 version of Million Arthur Arcana Blood has removed NICE CHINCHIN (thought it was just PC release, but it was the American version.)
The cover of SNK 40th Annivesary Collection with Athena (minute but also quite stupid given the legacy design)
are the ones that personally affect me, since I reckon you want a personal bias. I don't know much about the other games but the fact that people were mad about it, you talk to them about it and why they buy these games.
Plus, it doesn't matter if I have games to name or not. The fact it happened once is by all means irritating to me. I do not think this is a good stance. I do not like the lack of definition to the censorship but I also believe it shouldn't be there to begin with.I wasn't okay with Nintendo doing it forever ago up until now. The only time I'm okay with censorship is with Microsoft focusing on the external components outside of a game, such as voice chat to regulate communication.
At least satisfy me with set guidelines. At least give me that.
Are scenes being censored or not? If not why are we having this discussion if they are at least they are doing something. If some devs think it's too much of a hassle to submit their games they are free to skip Sony's platform.
I don't really agree with this because it ends up affecting some niche games and not all of them are exploitative junk, and banning games totally from a platform unless they're truly egregious isn't a great stance. I agree in practice it's ineffectual, and the ultimate goal is to just not have that stuff in the first place. But there's a commercial incentive to do this in Japan, and you have to start somewhere....
The problem is those "guidelines" are not shared with developers. They literally don't know if any edits will be mandated before they have submitted their game and we have a developer on record saying you could submit the game and only be asked to change one small thing and then when you re-submit you are told to change even more.
There's no consistency or communication. Developers are not given a list to work off or anything close to it.
That's what they're doing. Steam and Nintendo are their go to's now.
Xenoblade 2 is Still incredibly referential with religion, they just used less known religious names except for stuff that just straight up says "God" or heaven or whathaveyou
I agree with you both that there is more to be done here but I feel any step no matter how small it is, is better than to just sit there and let it go by without any issue.
At the very least now developers will be wary what to put in their games.
I agree they need to clarify the guidelines, they definetly should do that as it would save too much time for everyone.
As for the other things you mentioned. Athena being removed from the cover should be obvious why, the character looks like a child (yes I know Athena don't look like that in the game but the art work does have a moe childlike style). The other game you mentioned I am not sure about and need to look it up. From what you are saying they removed a character?
You know, I've had people tell me the Neptunia series is totally cool and I should play it.
After seeing that image, I want to stay as far away from that creepy shit as humanly possible.
Censored pedophilia is still pedophilia. Purity rays and steam clouds aren't doing much, in some cases they even backfire and make the content more visually suggestive.
And the "hassle" here is forcing devs globally to submit in (for most) a non-native language, under shifting undefined rules and tell them to keep quiet about it. Sony's intent has merit, their execution is a nightmare and results are basically worthless so far. Doing nothing actually would be better arguably.
The edits vary wildly, from additional mist, to lights, to small adjustments to clothing etc. But the sexual nature of the scenes remains intact. This is what some of us have been saying for months but people have been acting like everyone who doesn't pat Sony on their back for their ineffectual policies is somehow in favour of pedo shit.
I think the "look at SNES-era Nintendo!" only makes sense if you ignore the circumstances in that situation.
When Nintendo entered into the video game console market in the eighties, they were looking at Atari's crash. Atari made many mistakes, such as massive sales overestimation, but a big part of their issue was lack of content control. This included a lack of concern for even the basic functionality of Atari games - like, if they even worked or not - as well as content issues, as Atari had upset parents and special interest groups with such games as Custer's Revenge, where you play as General Custer trying to rape a Native American woman.
Nintendo set content control policies in the eighties. But removing blood, religious references, and nudity were all just a part of a wider amount of control control policies. Their responses to Atari's problems also included the Nintendo Seal of Quality, which was not a promise that it was a good game so much as that it was a functional game. They also limited the amount of releases a company could put in a year in order to pressure them to release better games; Konami would actually circumvent this rule by forming a shell company simply so that they could use that name to release more games in North America.
In the nineties, this gave Sega and Sony the opportunity to market themselves to older consumers by providing content that Nintendo's strict policies did not allow. Additionally, Mortal Kombat prompted the creation of the ESRB, which took the pressure of content control away from Nintendo.
By now, much of what Nintendo used to do in its heavy censorship days are not done simply because there is no longer reason to do so. The idea that censorship will lead to the same things we saw in those days ignores the specific conditions that caused them and the motives behind them.
When Nintendo entered into the video game console market in the eighties, they were looking at Atari's crash. Atari made many mistakes, such as massive sales overestimation, but a big part of their issue was lack of content control. This included a lack of concern for even the basic functionality of Atari games - like, if they even worked or not - as well as content issues, as Atari had upset parents and special interest groups with such games as Custer's Revenge, where you play as General Custer trying to rape a Native American woman.
Nintendo set content control policies in the eighties. But removing blood, religious references, and nudity were all just a part of a wider amount of control control policies. Their responses to Atari's problems also included the Nintendo Seal of Quality, which was not a promise that it was a good game so much as that it was a functional game. They also limited the amount of releases a company could put in a year in order to pressure them to release better games; Konami would actually circumvent this rule by forming a shell company simply so that they could use that name to release more games in North America.
In the nineties, this gave Sega and Sony the opportunity to market themselves to older consumers by providing content that Nintendo's strict policies did not allow. Additionally, Mortal Kombat prompted the creation of the ESRB, which took the pressure of content control away from Nintendo.
By now, much of what Nintendo used to do in its heavy censorship days are not done simply because there is no longer reason to do so. The idea that censorship will lead to the same things we saw in those days ignores the specific conditions that caused them and the motives behind them.
Wtf ? They have all the power in the world to not allow games on their console, it's not a free market it's a closed eco-system.
Yeah no shit, if you censor a scene full of girls in tiny bikinis there is still gonna be a "sexual nature" afterwards, the only thing you could do to actually completely sensor it would be to have a full black screen.
Yep. Funny how some people still don't understand that.
Yep.
Yet people are still mad Sony is changing these games, hilarious.
You gotta be purposely obtuse to not get the issue after it's been spelled out to you so there's no point in continuing this conversation.
Look through this thread and see how many are annoyed and angry because of censorship vs the difficulty of submitting games and all the behind the scenes kinda stuff. But please let's end it here no point discussing this with you.
- Status