Why would Nintendo under Iwata pick up Bayonetta 2, Devil's Third and greenlight this crossover project if Iwata was really strict about keeping a family-friendly image? As for Kimishima, why would he have allowed things like Eternal Darkness, Geist and Paper Mario: the Thousand-Year Door (see Madame Flurrie) to be marketed and published by Nintendo of America whilst he was president if he also wanted to keep a family-friendly image?

I think we're missing a lot of information here, such as where the actual push for this style of censorship is coming from. Is it coming down from higher up like NCL or Reggie? Is it coming from puritanical or pro-social justice members of NOA's Treehouse? Is it simply overzealousness to meet certain age ratings? These are the kinds of questions that need to be answered before we simply blame the visible leaders.

Oh no, she has a shirt on!

Is the european version censored? I have no idea if EU games have the same content as the original or they too have been censored.

So, you're implying Nintendo prefers male skin?

Weird how Bayonetta 2 wasn't censored and how they still got her to appear in a Pegi 12 game with still getting her to somewhat undress herself. Also, Bayonetta was butt naked in Bayonetta 2. Not even ten minutes passed and she already undressed herself. So with Bayonetta not being censored and being a Pegi 16 game, why can't we have this game not censored?

You're misunderstanding me. I didn't say Iwata censored anything but I was just making a comparison between the Iwata and Kimishima. There's alot more censorship happening under Kimishima's leadership. I don't know if it's necessarily him pushing for more censorship in their games but at the very least he's allowing it. 

For this argument, developers making a mutual decision to edit a game in development vs a developer being forced to change something by people outside of the development team (Nintendo executive/PR, etc). It's not something we'd ever know, because no one would admit to discord over these types of changes. Certainly not in Japan.

Honestly, I don't think this was a case of censoring outfits out of fear of backlash. You'd hope that due to the market for the game and localization decision that have already been made, they'd be smart enough to leave it untouched. That didn't stop them with Fatal Frame though, so who knows.

Because that is all we see. If there is no cleavage there is only darkness.

Didn't they actually alter the costumes in the Japanese version before release?

Do people believe any change made is really censorship when it could just be the developer or publisher changing their mind on a property they have control of?

Does seeing fake skin on a digital underage female really matter that much to people?

Did the rise of the internet make people ungrateful idiots when it comes to games or did it just give the ones that were there a platform to show their colors and band together?


I mean we have people that knocked Nintendo for Zero Suit Samus and her alt costume showing too much skin or wear rocket heels in Smash 4, gets knocked for Fatal Frame removing bathing suits alt costumes for Nintendo ones and at this point it seems they are just getting knocked for everything not Mario or rated E.

I don't care about such an insignificant change. What about changing the Kiria had already occurred in the Japanese version.

What I find funny thing is how everyone thinks playing the original Japanese games when the original is all completely different from the localized versions on all platforms ever since.

For you to enjoy a Japanese game 100% you should know Japanese.