By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo - Nintendo made potato-chan a midget [Xenoblade X censorship]

Nuvendil on 01 November 2015
NoirSon said:
atomicblue said:
Jumpin said:

This is not censoreship, this is localization. This is not ESRB deciding they can't put this in, or Germany deciding they can't put this in. This is Nintendo's team who makes changes in order to make the game marketable in other markets; including translation, rewrites, and changes in content. It is not censoreship just because the localization team decided to remove something that Europeans would find inappropriate, it is making the game more marketable in Europe, because if they put stuff like that in the game, it will hurt its sales - and it is the localization team's job to make sure the game sells well in other markets.

This was the correct call by localization. If you are against it, provide a good argument as to why you think a child should have this sexualizing outfit, and saying "I don't like censoreship" is both a fallacious and a strawman argument.

Came here to say pretty much the same thing. Censorship specifically refers to suppression by an external body (government, ESRB, etc.) and this is something else entirely. People need to learn how to use words correctly.

This right here should be end of the thread and these stupid censorship arguement. It won't be but it should be, there are real world examples of censorship out there going on today in other countries across the globe. Complaining about a game company doing it with some fanservice is more of an example of a 'First World Problem'.

What makes this even more of a pointless discussion is that this change has essentially no impact on the product as a whole.  As a piece of art, a game is more than just a sum of parts and changing one part could have a large or nonexistent impact.  If this were, say, a crime drama game where you play as part of Vice or Public Morals (ye older Vice) fighting against a large human trafficking and sex trafficking ring and Nintendo of America retroactively replaced all the young and potentially underage scantily clad victims with women in their mid twenties wearing very modest dresses, THEN we would have a problem.  But it isn't.  These outfits were inconsequential from the start.  The important question to ask is if you went back in time and removed the part in question before the original product ever saw the light of day, would anyone ever have noticed?  If the answer is no, then the situation is of no consequence.



Around the Network
Chrizum on 01 November 2015
Ka-pi96 said:
Jumpin said:

This is not censoreship, this is localization. This is not ESRB deciding they can't put this in, or Germany deciding they can't put this in. This is Nintendo's team who makes changes in order to make the game marketable in other markets; including translation, rewrites, and changes in content. It is not censoreship just because the localization team decided to remove something that Europeans would find inappropriate, it is making the game more marketable in Europe, because if they put stuff like that in the game, it will hurt its sales - and it is the localization team's job to make sure the game sells well in other markets.

This was the correct call by localization. If you are against it, provide a good argument as to why you think a child should have this sexualizing outfit, and saying "I don't like censoreship" is both a fallacious and a strawman argument.



This kind of reply should be a bannable offense. It's downright insulting not only to the poster but to every reader to reply in this fashion to a well written argument in a perfectly fine discussion. Not to mention it makes you look incredibly stupid.



outlawauron on 02 November 2015
Chrizum said:
Ka-pi96 said:
Jumpin said:

This is not censoreship, this is localization. This is not ESRB deciding they can't put this in, or Germany deciding they can't put this in. This is Nintendo's team who makes changes in order to make the game marketable in other markets; including translation, rewrites, and changes in content. It is not censoreship just because the localization team decided to remove something that Europeans would find inappropriate, it is making the game more marketable in Europe, because if they put stuff like that in the game, it will hurt its sales - and it is the localization team's job to make sure the game sells well in other markets.

This was the correct call by localization. If you are against it, provide a good argument as to why you think a child should have this sexualizing outfit, and saying "I don't like censoreship" is both a fallacious and a strawman argument.



This kind of reply should be a bannable offense. It's downright insulting not only to the poster but to every reader to reply in this fashion to a well written argument in a perfectly fine discussion. Not to mention it makes you look incredibly stupid.

Jumpin's post doesn't even deserve a response. He is insane enough to suggest that removing and changing content for fear of backlash or moral high ground isn't censoring, and then calling anyone who is against censorship a pedophile. Yeah, some great stuff. Really intellectually stimulating.

Self-censorship has been a thing for generations, and whether you think they should do it or not. To argue it's not censorship is laughable and worth a facepalm.



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.

Torillian on 02 November 2015

Even if self censorship weren't a thing aren't those calling this "Nintendo censoring themselves" only doing so because they decided to look at it with broad brush strokes? Instead couldn't you call it "Nintendo's localization team censoring the work of Monolith Soft"? In which case it is an outside body from the developer and would be censorship even by the definition that requires the censorship be from outside.



...

etking on 02 November 2015

All cloth-items can be equipped by multiple characters, so all female characters are heavily censored if the bikinis are censored. And censorship is always bad because it destroys the vision of a game. None of the other female characters is underage.

It is like forcing all women to wear a burkini instead of a bikini at the beach which is wrong.



Around the Network
Ruler on 02 November 2015

latest video from censored gaming, they also never raised her age to 15, shes still 13



Why i left PC gaming

 

(2015) Question for PS4 owners: if the situation would be reverse? would you still play on PS4?

(2015) The "I don't care PS4 is the most powerful console" thread