Opinions on censoring teen games (speculation and debate)

Discussion in 'THREAD ARCHIVES' started by KuroBuros The Infected, Jan 23, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. So Nintendo of America tends to censor teen rated games to make them appropriate for kids but it's not made for that age group. I have a gripe about it because I'm 19 and a majority of my favourite franchisees are as follows.

    Fire Emblem
    Smash Bros
    Legend of Zelda

    Now apparently in Fire Fates there is a S-Rank support conversation for the male avatar and a male character in the Japanese version talking (or joking) about drugging the character then the propose happens. If the rumors are true Nintendo of America isn't just simply going change the conversation. They will remove the S-Rank for the couple entirely.

    So with that said, what is your opinion on this matter or censorship in general?
  2. People are too sensitive, if games are to be treated as an art form there's going to be questionable content.
    And even if you're one of those people who scream censorship, we already have ESRB. They should try respecting that rather than demanding everything be rated E.
  3. I mainly hate when it is meant for an older age group and it's censored. FE:F isn't a kid's game.
  4. Fire Emblem likely get's it harder than most because of it's anime art style.
    Which a lot of North American parents instantly associate to Cartoons, which are then associated with being for kids.

    And yes I know of cases like Tom and Jerry, but the idea of censorship doesn't follow the path of logic and reason. :P
  5. I think this is less a sensitivity issue and more a marketing issue. Simply put, the western market is different and there are different allocations to acceptable to maintain certain ratings. In the western market, a conversation about drugging someone as the pinnacle of a relationship achievement (is that not what S rank is, or is there a double-S or star rank in this game?) is not acceptable for a T rating. I don't consider it any more different than that PC (personal computer, not politically correct) games are significantly more popular in America than in Japan and that more grindy MMOs are popular in Korea/China than Europe/America.
    • Like Like x 1
  6. I'm a bit in agreement with Soulless. I think changes between games are just a natural part of releasing games in different cultures. Different cultures find different things acceptable, and drug use seems to have a different connotation in the US. Personally I would have preferred the content to have remained the same, but I understand that my tastes don't match the mainstream. If people don't want to see something in a game, maybe it is better to take it out so more people buy the game and I get to experience another fire emblem. Though if it was taken out simply to meet a rating, then that would make me rather sad. I think that I want to experience the fire emblem that the creators wanted me to experience. I will naturally have a distaste when 3rd parties interfere in that.
  7. Support conversations go C,B,A for non marriageable supports. C,B,A,S for marriageable.
  8. I rather them change the date rape part then take it out. :c
  9. Same. But simultaneously, considering they'd need to get the voice actors, writer, and approval, it isn't hard to see why removal is easier.
  10. It's disheartening.
  11. The whole reason it's a marketing issue though is because people are sensitive about it.
    If they weren't then the Market would have no reason to be worried.
  12. I think that's jumping to conclusions. When in doubt, occam's razor. It's far simpler to say "it just doesn't sell well" rather than, because of some societal flaw in western society, this results. I feel that concluding it's because of some flaw in western culture is kind of jumping to conclusions. Is the bigger market for Korea's grindy MMOs because western markets are stupider/lazier, or because Koreans/Chinese people tend to more actively waste their time? Is Fire Emblem removing a scene when localizing because western markets are sensitive prudes or because japanese markets are immoral and lecherous?

    At that point, such conclusions seem more to me as personal bias and conjecture to explain a phenomenon rather than just observe the phenomenon to exist as it is.
  13. I don't like it when games get censored from their original form to suit a different market, because I want to experience it as the developer fully intended. However, I also understand it from a business perspective: they want to make the most money possible, and taking out possibly offensive content is a reasonable strategy to avoid people raging and starting boycott campaigns against it, so it's something that happens. I'm rather disappointed that the US is one of those places where people will throw a shit fit hard enough to cause foreign developers or publishers to censor their work to bring it here, especially since most of the butthurt rage comes from people who are only talking about video games because of political/ideological reasons rather than because they actually play the fucking games and have a true vested interest in the state of the product.

    So I do think it's lame and shouldn't happen, but I'm not going to get mad at the developer/publisher for doing it. They're in the business of making money, and sometimes censoring their products is a viable strategy to maximize profits. I'm far more angry at the segment of outrage culture that exists in the US and other western nations that makes censorship a very reasonable consideration, because that's the real root of the problem.
    • Like Like x 3
    • Love Love x 1
  14. The support is female and expressedly lesbian. When her drink is spiked, she falls in love with the (male) avatar.

    Now, said character can obtain s-rank supports with other male characters (and none of the females) so that's telling of how seriously we should take her lesbian act (especially since avatar can take part in homosexual marriage) but the implication here is what's dodgy.

    Should this be censored? By principal I'd say no, but I'm not gonna get angry about a bad support getting altered/removed to prevent the obvious shitstorm.
  15. ^Well if you're looking at it as an inherent flaw there's your problem. :P

    It's common business sense that you want to appeal to your audience.
    If the audience doesn't respond well to X scene, it makes sense business wise to remove it.

    If you want to view it as a flaw is up to the individual (in my case I do).
    But to inheritingly assume it's a flaw? And as a result claim we're jumping to conclusions?
    I'd argue that the assumption that it's inherently a universal flaw that's jumping to conclusions.
  16. Well, I mean, I'd agree, if it weren't observable that people in the west are generally extremely sensitive to media content. While you are right in saying that it is easier to prove it doesn't sell well, it isn't purely due to bias that Gwazi points to sensitivity as the cause.
  17. Yes, thank you! I was just about to add that the support was actually between the male avatar and a female character.

    Aside from the drug reference, I think part of the issue was that the female character was supposed to be gay, and that drugging her was done 'change' her sexuality so she could fall in love with the male avatar, or something along those lines.

    (Here are some actual articles on the issue for people who don't know)
    Fire Emblem Fates Will Have “Controversial Dialogue” Changed In The West - Siliconera
    Fire Emblem: Fates controversial scene removed from Western release

    In this case I (personally) think the change was for the better. The game's gotten a lot of flack for some of the incesty relationships and how it handles gay relationships.
    I don't believe in censorship, but I do think some of the original dialogues and choices in the game were in bad taste and could be improved upon rather than completely removed.
  18. Weren't you the one that said it was because people were "too sensitive"? I'm merely assuming your position is that it is a flaw in society, because "too sensitive" has negative or flaw connotations.

    Now I'm confused. What's your point or position?

    I personally don't see it as a flaw. I assumed that was what your position that the cause of changes in games during localization was because of a flaw in society, which I proposed was a personal conjecture rather than reality observation. I do apologize if I'm unclear.
  19. Yes I do. But that's my personal outlook on society getting offended by it.

    Which is different than claiming than the argument of "Society reacts badly to it" is making a jump of assumption for being negative.
    Because for some people, they will still acknowledge westerners don't like it. But they may see it in a "They're right to! Promoting rape is wrong!" idea.

    So when you say:
    You're effectively dismissing any explanation for it not selling well, because someone, somewhere is going to view that reason as a flaw.
  20. Okay, allow me to clarify:

    I am saying that conjecture as to why it doesn't sell well, when seen as a societal flaw as you have done when saying it is because "people are too sensitive" (am I incorrect here?) is more or less idle conjecture. Unless there are studies, surveys, or game makers themselves going "my art is being censored via localization" then I don't believe there is much more than personal conjecture.

    Though if there are surveys, studies, and game designers themselves saying that other cultures are censoring their artwork and expressions, that's something else to discuss entirely.

    I will admit I do apologize if I'm not understanding your point correctly.
    • Useful Useful x 1
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.