Aside from the fact that this is a non-issue to begin with (which it really is), that just seems like blame shifting (though what blame they are trying to shift I do not know).

StarOcean said: The real pervs are the ones who complain about it. They're the ones looking for the panties to complain about to begin with

This doesn't really make sense as I was not calling anyone a perv to begin with....

Need to sort out her pointy freaking ears first. Im earist.

omg, now I can't buy the game. Thanks a lot Obama

Guess I'm not getting the game, then. Thanks a lot, Square Enix!

Sheesh, if you're going to copy me at least blame the right person responsible.

Oh for the love of...THIS HAS BEEN STANDARD OPPERATING PROCEDURE FOR PUBLISHERS AND CREATORS FOR CENTURIES.  My word, if most people were aware of the enormous changes made in the creation and publication process of books to avoid controversies that could turn off their main audience, they would have a stroke.  And the same goes for movies, tv shows, video games, everything.  And it has been that way since LONG before the internet and SJWs and all these other boogymen.  The people who brand games like Star Ocean 5 with a scarlet letter for changing a pair of panties not only are missing the forest for the trees (there are far more dangerous forms of censorship and publisher tyranny to be worried about) but also implicitly support the concept of a work of art being nothing more or less than the sum of its parts and changing any one is unacceptable and irreparably damages the whole.  Which is patently untrue and a rather adolescent view of a work of art.  It also implies the original is the unfiltered vision of the artist which is also patently untrue, as publishers and the artist himself constantly think and rethink the impact of the details of their work on the intended audience.  Very few just spew out their unfiltered vision and the majority who do are not successful.

In short there's a reason why I call stuff like this localization edits and not censorship.  Yes, censorship's black letter denotative  definition fits, but the current outright toxic connotation does NOT fit.  Censorship is also broad denotatively and lacks precision.  Censorship technically is everywhere, all the time, and is even necessary to a civil society.  But we don't say that because we intentionally use other terms to avoid stretching the word censorship too far because then it loses all connotative impact.  

They still let you look up her skirt.

Listen to yourself. Listen to the complaints. "I don't like this, because when I look up the skirt of this teenager in a videogame she is wearing different panties."

Does it really matter?

That should be the first hint it isn't.

Unneeded censorship always matters.