Atlus was involved with the changes.
In fact, you can basically tell when they were and weren't as fine with the changes based on the effort they put into them.
-
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 of Japan apologizes for not telling customers that TMS #FE Encore is based on altered Western version of the original, offering full refunds
- Thread starter vestan
- Start date
In fact, you can basically tell when they were and weren't as fine with the changes based on the effort they put into them.
It isn't, because by entering a contract with your publisher you're allowing them to stick their hand into your work.
If you self published a novel and the government cracked down on you and said you could no longer sell it, that would be censorship.
They are. And the underage anime tiddy makes them suuuuuuuuuuper uncomfortable, you see. So uncomfortable, yes. The most. /s
Well, there's plenty of people on here that browse both websites. It's good to have a little diversity, ya know?
There's an innate link between free speech and pedophilia, I think, in that kids are pretty much the only group that every major group on earth feels deserves protection in some way. You might not be a racial minority, a woman, gay, or trans, but you were definitely a kid at some point.
So if you're a free speech absolutist, you end up having to face child porn, which is the one thing that basically everyone agrees should be censored. You can say that the government can lock you up for years for trying to communicate this and most people will go "yep, sounds good".
The result is that it becomes kind of a weird litmus test.
For asshole technocrats, they just like talking about free speech because it lets them be abusive dicks, and they have no real desire to defend it when they don't stand to gain for it. Reddit's an example, where they started off giving a plaque to the guy who founded the Jailbait subreddit because their sexualization of underage girls drew in a ton of traffic to their website, but then when there started to be the smell of potential legal risk they buckle and start closing subreddits. So it turns out they're only absolutists while it's convenient for them to be.
On the other hand, you've got the likes of 8chan, who claim free speech absolutism because they're just a bunch of pedophiles, and they don't ever clamp down that hard even when they've got the spotlight on them because pedophilia is the only reason they're there.
I dunno how closely this is related to the thread at hand, but this talk just reminds me.
no some people want the pedophilia and use free speech as an argument to get it
that's all this is. These fleabags will stan for pedophilia and naziism but don't give a shit when leftist orgs and groups are clamped down on. You 're drinking their kool aid by thinking it's about free speech first and pedophilia second. There's no such thing as free speech absolutism because even self proclaimed absolutists have their exceptions, usually something that actually targets the things they spend all of their time defending.
In the grand scheme of things it doesn't really change anything in regards the characters development and the overall story. Honestly it just turns something that would be seen as creepy in the west to endearingly silly. Its really not that deep.
I believe I accounted for that when I mentioned 8chan, but yeah, that happens.
you started with the benefit of the doubt, and that's never deserved here. 8chan should not be a footnote. These people just want pedophilia. The topic itself is always the primary context and the arguments being used are always secondary. So if someone is saying they're "A free speech absolutist", but they're really in here and passionate about pedophilia-- being a "free spech absolutist" comes secondary to their wonton defense of pedophilia.
Nope
I understand that the idea of censorship was originally but it isn't the dictionary definition of it and expression of the original intention is definitely being curtailed. If I'm misunderstanding I apologize
See it would be one thing if Atlus JP changed the dialogue or suggested it but Atlus USA is not the same office and doesn't have the same people working on the dialogue therefore are an outside entity. If Atlus JP did suggest the change or if it somehow doesn't matter as long as its the same company then I apologize for the misunderstanding.
ok bro
I'm optimistic that this will eventually become the ideal way to play this game -- and I'm happy to wait until it's that state before picking up and starting it again
So you are saying censorship can be fine if it is done with the context of the audience in mind?
So you think a localization change from within the same company to make a Native American character not have a slur for a name is censorship. Who is being censored? What governing body stepped in to change the character from Redman to Kinap?
It's amazing to see people throwing around 'censorship' as a pejorative because they're upset they don't get their 17 year old anime women wearing revealing clothing.
Get a fucking grip, Jesus.
Get a fucking grip, Jesus.
They have a grip; their grip is onto their pedophilic imagery and it'll be taken from their cold, dead hands
I think you're misreading what I'm saying. The whole point I was making was that it's pretty much inevitable that free speech absolutism fails because there's one thing that is pretty much universally agreed that we don't care about free speech in the face of.
So when that's brought out, we end up seeing their actual nature, because either they have to buckle and admit that censorship is fine sometimes, or they have to admit that they do actually care but only about getting pedo shit.
My point is that it's not free speech absolutism. It's an excuse. Granting them the premise of their argument cedes too much ground and is where I take issue with your post.
The fuck is the point of criticism if it can't lead to change? "I was wrong, but I won't fix my mistake because that'd be pretending it didn't happen". This is one of the shittiest excuses I've heard for people to hang on to their sexualized minors, and damn if that's not a high bar to clear.
Keeping sexualized minors in a game is not the "mature" thing to do. Asking audiences to pretend sexualized minors aren't in their games is not asking them to "handle problematic content and talk about it". This is alt-right "grow a thicker skin" levels of fuckery.
In the sense that a scene can be written to be creepy, convey creepiness, and that it's not necessarily a negative thing, yes. I may have misread, but his posts gave me a sense of depiction = endorsement.
Fuck I was going be tactful but you just went out and said it. Much respect, man, tell it like it is.
I see what you're trying to do and yes but it's not exactly the same case in my eyes. You're arguing the idea that the awareness would be lost on western audiences so they changed it but its still Japan here and I feel like this issue could've been circumvented with overall better description/dialogue honestly.
If censorship is defined by a governing body stepping in to change content then I sincerely apologize for this entire thing I caused but I still don't see how thats a requirement since its not part of the description of censor/censorship
User Banned (Permanent): Excusing the Sexualized Depiction of Minors; Prior Severe Bans for Dismissing Concerns of Representation and for Sexism
It was a game about japanese idols and gravure idols (that was a 20 year old), probably shouldn't have made the game about japanese idols if they have to censor themselves for that content. 16-20 year old idols in bikinis etc. make it a pedo game now? That's a bit much and wrong by definition.
You would have to throw out 90% of every J-RPGS hot well scenes or dlc costumes etc. from Persona to Final Fantasy, Tales etc. etc.
The problem is that the depiction was an endorsement in this case.
oh i'm sure they have a grip on something alright
you say that like it's a bad thing
I think the people getting angry and fired up over it being removed makes it a pedo game for them because that's clearly not just a part of the product but the reason they're there in the first place.
Also did you just sneak in "it's really ebebeophilia" with the bold and underlined, cuz damn son
Man I'm sure gonna be sour on the experience if I don't get my big anime tiddy 16 year old girls. It really has an artful, subtle statement about society, y'know? But if it's big anime tiddy 17 year olds with slightly more (skintight) clothing I just don't know if it'll convey the same message. I'm not sure, I'll just have to wait until it comes out and my dick will inform me, I suppose.
You guys are saying the same thing. L Thammy is making the exact argument than you, that people using "free speech absolutism" are not, in fact, doing so out of some actual ideological purity, but because of an ulterior, thinly veiled (and almost always disgusting) motive; he's just using a different example as proof for it.
Quite the jump to a random conclusion you made with that but no I'm not making this argument for the tits like many of you want to believe, its largely cuz I don't want the game to lose a considerable amount of sales because of this decision and do think some changes were dumb like the wedding dress being really lazily modified.
There's always one.
my dude the game went triple cardboard in sales when it came out on the wii u despite the word of mouth, you really think it was gonna be any different this time around?
Okay so if censorship is okay when there are cultural contextual matters at play, then why is it okay with changing one thing because of cultural reasons but wrong for another thing to be changed for cultural reasons?
It being in japan means nothing. It is still something that reads totally different without an understanding and cultural acceptance of the Japanese context.
Also can we please fucking stop with the semantical battles that go absolutely nowhere? The only reason to be so invested in winning the "this is censorship / this is not censorship" battle is to entirely circumvent the "this is good / this is bad" discussion and replace it with a chain of flimsy dogmas like "this is censorship (because I say so) + censorship is ALWAYS bad (because I say so) = this is objectively bad". This is the epitome of disingenuous and should frankly be bannable.
We're sort of saying the same thing but I'm taking very minor umbridge with the way it's being said. I like formulating arguments so that ideas I don't want to have wiggle room don't start out with it at all because I know that people skim past like the first sentence. It's a tricky art and I don't always get it right, myself. Adapting arguments for how they'll be consumed on the platform they're being presented on is an important part of making impactful arguments.
User Banned (1 Month): Disturbing and Inappropriate Commentary; Thread Derail
I purposefully watch stuff to get disturbed, yes. It's a good way to test your level of empathy. Obviously not child porn, but I have seen footage of people getting killed (suicide or murder) purposefully to get disturbed, because you need to be disturbed every once in a while to truly appreciate things.
ask yourself why you even had to clarify this, because boy let me tell you, there is a reason
Yes actually, it was a niche release on the wii u in 2016 which were 3 telltale signs of doom and 2 are removed in this release with a better release date with switch at its peak and after a major FE releade and on a successful console.
Couldn't a similar case be made for something like yakuza though with how they run and yet nothing at least in the main story was changed. What about-ism aside definitely still think that the understanding part could've been fixed with better explanation of the industry the cultural acceptance possibly could've been an issue but we have no real way of knowing
Because I didn't want my post to appear to be condoning people watching child porn. Sure, call me a pedophile though if you'd like.
it fundamentaly was though
how else are we supposed to take "i like watching things when they make me uncomfortable" when it's being said in the context of this entire thread, and more importantly, why would you think that an argument worth making given the context of the entire thread while demonstrating an awareness of how it could be taken. By making a statement that even needs that clarification, you're okay with making a statement that could be read as such, and thus, your defense reads as a mere token effort.
We can see right through you.