The removal and editing of content in video games

[TrishaCat]

I've been seeing a lot of this happen of late and admittedly I've grown really tired of it. What brought this thread on was the release of the game "Mugen Souls" on Steam. The game, when it was originally brought to the US, was published by NIS America, who had removed a mini-game from the game along with supposedly 120+ CGs, all due to the nature of them. Finally, after all this time, the company Ghostlight, which handled the release of the Agarest games on Steam, released Mugen Souls on Steam. It was the censored version. When asked about it, Ghostlight responded that Valve wouldn't let them release the uncensored version on Steam.

And with this, I've come to grow really tired of the removal of content in Western releases. Admittedly, the game in question has plenty of questionable content, so I can understand taking issue with, or even offense at it. I can understand being uncomfortable with it. But what I don't understand, is the removal of content that isn't illegal. Its certainly questionable, but its not illegal, and what its doing is alienating an already niche audience for a niche game. The original release of the game did not sell well. 

But anyways, I got upset at Valve and sent them a message regarding that. But the thing is, is that I'm not even upset with just Mugen Souls or anything; a bunch of games have gotten unnecessary censors of late, with some needing it more than others. Just recently, Fatal Frame 5: Maiden of Black Water was released digitally only on the Wii U by Nintendo of America, who removed a bunch of lewd bonus costumes from the game (along with putting memes in the trailer for it, but that's another story). They also edited cutscenes featuring lewd outfits, with one in particular lessening one of the whole points of a character in the game, who is depressed and unhappy with her job, as she works and models as a Japanese idol. I don't understand it; the game is even rated M. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3U07cZ9-7Y

But nevermind all that, a bunch of games I've been interested (and not interested in) have gotten censored over time, which is really weird when compared to other games. Here's a list of some I know of:

Drakengard 1 (I'm actually quite upset about this one; its a game I really appreciate despite how bad the gameplay is, and its so old that this is likely never going to be fixed), Mugen Souls, Fatal Frame 5: Maiden of Black Water, Agarest: Generations of War 2, Bravely Default, Fire Emblem Awakening, Dungeon Travelers 2, Monster Monpiece, and Criminal Girls: Invite Only.

I find that the censorship of video games or removal of content, especially in localization, is damaging and dangerous to art. Its true that in most of these cases, its sleazy scenes that are removed or changed, (Drakengard being the biggest and arguably most interesting exception), but this dictates what people can and cannot do with a work as well as how people should interpret a work, and it discourages people from creating things that push lines for whatever goal they may want to achieve....Err...I'm not really good at wording this. There are other people who have done a better job of explaining this, with the one I remember most being some people who work at XSeed, another game licensing company in the US. There's also Neil Gaiman, a comic writer, who does a wonderful job of explaining it (http://journal.neilgaiman.com/2008/12/why-defend-freedom-of-icky-speech.html) But I believe that the removal and editing of something is dangerous and discomforting. Even if I don't like the content in something I don't really want it to be removed or edited for mass audiences or to play it safe. This also sets a precedent for what other companies can do. "Well, this company did it so we should be able to get away with it too" and so on. I also find that its disrespectful to the original creator's vision for what the games are supposed to be....

I'm just getting really tired of games being edited and censored. I'd be more okay with it if companies would at least put out patches to re-add the content for those fans who do want it, even if its by unofficial means. JAST did this when they released a porn game titled "Starless: Nymphomaniacs Paradise", and the creators of Huniepop did this for people who bought the Steam version of the game. If this happened, then those people who are okay with the removal of such content would have what they want, and those who aren't would get all the content that was removed back in their game. 

...Also I'm sorry if this reads really disjointed or doesn't flow well, or I don't do a good job of explaining my thoughts on things I'm also not exactly sure how to make this thread less rant-y and more like a normal thread.

Edited October 23, 2015 by Battlechili

[SirRob]

Fire Emblem Awakening is the only one of those games I've played. In that game's case, I think the content that was removed was MORE damaging and dangerous to art than its removal. Fire Emblem Fates is gonna be even worse. The focus on fanservice undoubtedly takes away time that could be used to improve other aspects of the game. I agree that censorship -can- hurt the quality of the game and artistic expression, but sometimes fluff can get in the way of those things as well.

[Imperial Impact]

[TrishaCat]

Fire Emblem Awakening is the only one of those games I've played. In that game's case, I think the content that was removed was MORE damaging and dangerous to art than its removal. Fire Emblem Fates is gonna be even worse. The focus on fanservice undoubtedly takes away time that could be used to improve other aspects of the game. I agree that censorship -can- hurt the quality of the game and artistic expression, but sometimes fluff can get in the way of those things as well.

But if the fluff is already there, would removing it do much good, necessarily? In Fire Emblem Awakening's case, it was just an image that was edited; a towel was placed in front of part of an image in the hopes of making it show less. Does doing that do any good for the game? Does it make the parts any less fluff?

[SirRob]

There was more censorship in Awakening than just that. Incestuous relationships and allusions to pedophilia were also censored. : )

[Derin Darkpaw]

I had never heard of Mugen Souls until I saw it pop up on Steam and after taking one look at it I was like nope.  Just ridiculous amounts of fanservice and oversexualized characters that look like they are way too young.  If what they left in is stuff they decided not to censor then I shudder to imagine what they had to cut out.

Also I feel similarly, if for different reasons, about Drakengard 1.  I love that game to, but its fucking dark as hell and the characters are messed up to high heaven.  If the game had been any darker or had left in certain content then it likely wouldn't even have gotten the small fan following that it did.

On a more serious note regarding censorship of games in general.  Games are art, but they are art that takes a large number of people an incredible amount of time to work on and that takes money.  Because of this immense amount of capital and time they take to make games must also treat themselves as a product and a brand on top of being art.  That means if they need to change things in the game to avoid alienating their potential customer base then they not only have a right, but an obligation to the game creators and companies to do so.  Also they can't just let patched versions with the censored content in them be officially endorsed because that would confuse customers about their brand which would again hurt sales.

Another important thing to remember is that different cultures respond to certain types of content differently.  This isn't just a matter of the United States culture being repressed or Japanese culture being too weird.  You can't just transplant something from one culture into another with no regard to how the new culture will react to the content or you can but in regards to a product that you want lots of people to spend money on that will cost you a lot of sales.

[yell0wf0x]

Japan has a different culture in general. Yer talking about a place where it's normal to sell erotic games to teenagers. I'm sure localization teams remove these to avoid legal issues too. 

[TrishaCat]

I had never heard of Mugen Souls until I saw it pop up on Steam and after taking one look at it I was like nope.  Just ridiculous amounts of fanservice and oversexualized characters that look like they are way too young.  If what they left in is stuff they decided not to censor then I shudder to imagine what they had to cut out.

Also I feel similarly, if for different reasons, about Drakengard 1.  I love that game to, but its fucking dark as hell and the characters are messed up to high heaven.  If the game had been any darker or had left in certain content then it likely wouldn't even have gotten the small fan following that it did.

On a more serious note regarding censorship of games in general.  Games are art, but they are art that takes a large number of people an incredible amount of time to work on and that takes money.  Because of this immense amount of capital and time they take to make games must also treat themselves as a product and a brand on top of being art.  That means if they need to change things in the game to avoid alienating their potential customer base then they not only have a right, but an obligation to the game creators and companies to do so.  Also they can't just let patched versions with the censored content in them be officially endorsed because that would confuse customers about their brand which would again hurt sales.

Another important thing to remember is that different cultures respond to certain types of content differently.  This isn't just a matter of the United States culture being repressed or Japanese culture being too weird.  You can't just transplant something from one culture into another with no regard to how the new culture will react to the content or you can but in regards to a product that you want lots of people to spend money on that will cost you a lot of sales.

But the whole point of Drakengard was how incredibly screwed up the world and its characters are. Yoko Taro likes writing stories about murderers, and what it takes to bring someone to kill, and other sorts of things. His stories are about the characters, and cutting out some of that content because it might make someone uncomfortable is counterproductive to what Taro is trying to do with his games. And Mugen Souls...Well...Its far from the lewdest game to be brought to the West, and even in an uncensored state it wouldn't have broken any laws. You say it made you uncomfortable, but then again...Isn't that an example of what's going on? It being censored didn't stop you from being put off. So what's the point? You aren't' going to buy the game either way.

Yes, games are products, but is it right for companies to assume responsibility for what content is suitable for someone or not? Who are they to say that something is too offensive for someone? Isn't that each individual's personal decision on what content they want to participate in and are okay with? And why do people need to be shielded from other cultures? Couldn't it hurt a game and make it lose its identity to a degree to Americanize it? People understand that there are other cultures out there, and not every country has the same standards and such out there, and generally if someone is buying a video game they are already informed about what the game is. For especially niche products, such as Mugen Souls for example, removing the thing that attracts the niche in the first place alienates the only audience it had. Its not going to make a game available for a wider audience; if the wider audience wasn't interested in the first place removing lewd images isn't going to bring in that wider audience.

Japan has a different culture in general. Yer talking about a place where it's normal to sell erotic games to teenagers. I'm sure localization teams remove these to avoid legal issues too. 

Most of these games untouched aren't breaking any laws though. Some could be argued to straddle the line, but others don't and none of them outright break it. This is especially true for Fatal Frame 5, Fire Emblem Awakening, and Drakengard.

EDIT: Sorry if I seem kind of rude or something, its just...I've been really upset recently over how many games keep getting changed when brought over to the US in these past couple years. Mugen Souls and Fatal Frame came out days from each other. Seems like censorship is even more common nowadays than it was say, 10 years ago.

Edited October 24, 2015 by Battlechili

[RTDragon]

For someone who has played Mugen Souls and Mugen Souls Z PS3 Version which NIS America published. There's a good reason for the censorship. And the fact there was a bathing minigame as well. Though those CG's that were censored in Z are in the game you have to unlocked them most likely post game considering i have not beaten Z but the original and got the normal ending.

Edited October 24, 2015 by RTDragon

[Derin Darkpaw]

But the whole point of Drakengard was how incredibly screwed up the world and its characters are. Yoko Taro likes writing stories about murderers, and what it takes to bring someone to kill, and other sorts of things. His stories are about the characters, and cutting out some of that content because it might make someone uncomfortable is counterproductive to what Taro is trying to do with his games. And Mugen Souls...Well...Its far from the lewdest game to be brought to the West, and even in an uncensored state it wouldn't have broken any laws. You say it made you uncomfortable, but then again...Isn't that an example of what's going on? It being censored didn't stop you from being put off. So what's the point? You aren't' going to buy the game either way.

Yes, games are products, but is it right for companies to assume responsibility for what content is suitable for someone or not? Who are they to say that something is too offensive for someone? Isn't that each individual's personal decision on what content they want to participate in and are okay with? And why do people need to be shielded from other cultures? Couldn't it hurt a game and make it lose its identity to a degree to Americanize it? People understand that there are other cultures out there, and not every country has the same standards and such out there, and generally if someone is buying a video game they are already informed about what the game is. For especially niche products, such as Mugen Souls for example, removing the thing that attracts the niche in the first place alienates the only audience it had. Its not going to make a game available for a wider audience; if the wider audience wasn't interested in the first place removing lewd images isn't going to bring in that wider audience.

Most of these games untouched aren't breaking any laws though. Some could be argued to straddle the line, but others don't and none of them outright break it. This is especially true for Fatal Frame 5, Fire Emblem Awakening, and Drakengard.

EDIT: Sorry if I seem kind of rude or something, its just...I've been really upset recently over how many games keep getting changed when brought over to the US in these past couple years. Mugen Souls and Fatal Frame came out days from each other. Seems like censorship is even more common nowadays than it was say, 10 years ago.

I still feel like Drakengard managed to  convey everything you mentioned there very well even with the censorship.  Putting in the additional content may have served to only further alienate people from the story.  Art is worthless if it isn't consumed or discussed.  Also yes Mugen Souls still managed to make me uncomfortable, but the censorship of certain scenes could still be the difference between a wider audience buying it or not buying it.

As for companies they are not making a decision about what is suitable for someone they are simply making a decision about what will give their product more appeal.  While I can't personally know their exact motivations it is likely that they didn't cut this content out for some moral reasons, but rather in an attempt to make their product more attractive to a new audience.  Also again it isn't a matter of shielding people from other cultures.  I doubt the decision was made out of a desire to protect Americans from being exposed to Japanese culture.  I believe the decision was more likely made out of a recognition that American and Japanese culture are immensely different and that for their product to appeal to American culture they would need to change and/or remove certain elements. 

I tend to be an optimist in things like this and I am merely assuming the best from the company here.  If it was revealed that they are actually censoring it out of some perceived moral obligation or some desire to protect Americans from Japanese culture then I would agree that censorship for those reasons is generally not acceptable.

As for the matter of legality sure they aren't displaying anything outright illegal, but in the U.S. if the game crosses a certain line for content it could end up with a NC-17 rating.  This rating is the kiss of death to any game that actually intends to make a profit and would seriously hampers the methods of distribution one is able to use in order to sell their product.

On a more personal note I want you to understand that I do not in any think you are being rude and I am enjoying this discussion.  However I understand that some times in pursuit of a good debate I can get a little pushy or aggressive.  When I am in person I can usually monitor body language to determine when I am making a person uncomfortable or upset, but with text I don't have that luxury.  If I am actually making you feel uncomfortable or upset that is not my intent so please let me know if I am so that I can adjust my behavior.

[AnotherWizard]

I don't usually have a problem with this if the game is say, in beta or early access.

However if the game is finished then I see a problem with this. It's very anti consumer and unnecessary. The only time I can accept a developer removing content from a game is if it's the multiplayer component because they're shutting down the servers. (In the case of Metal Gear Solid 4 they removed Metal Gear Online from the game's menu in a patch because they took the servers down. I see this as acceptable for the most part). 

[yell0wf0x]

This happens more than most realize. The games in Germany, like TF2, have no blood, etc. It's gears and such. They're all mechanical over there.

Thankfully anime is less restricted. They TRIED with Terra-Formars in Japan, but after the second episode, they had enough complaints to go "Okay, fuck it, as you wish."

If more people would just be honest and voice their opinions to those that made the decisions, this would be far less of an issue.

rreminds me of how australia, germany, russia and some other countries blatantly censored the anal probe and abortion scenes in southpark stick of truth. I think this relates well to the topic at hand. It was a marketing decision  by ubisoft apparently and other obvious reasons like the Hitler references. 

[TrishaCat]

NoA please stop

http://operationrainfall.com/2016/04/24/tokyo-mirage-sessions-fe-altered-western-release/

This dungeon has story importance too. x_x

The dungeon is supposed to be anti-idol culture and the fact that all the characters were in somewhat sexualized poses was the entire point of the dungeon and holds some story importance.

And supposedly I heard that in Bravely Second a whole ending was cut from the game so that you only have happy endings now.

[major lee snake]

This has been going on forever.  Some games were deemed "too Japanese" to be released in the US, which means an overhaul was in progress.

 

One could argue that Totally Rad's localization was a stab at both the overhauls common at the era, and the general attitude of the era.

That said, I still think it's silly to remove and censor things that are otherwise fine.  If they were depicting full scale nudity and other such taboo subjects, then by all means.  But most it seems to be about removing fanservice from games that are otherwise for young children.  #FE seems to be aimed at the "lonely otaku" audience in the first place, so it having some areas "censored" goes against the whole point of the game.  Then again, it is Nintendo of America doing this, so this isn't entirely new of them; they just had a LOT more power in the past.

[TrishaCat]

Criminal Girls 2 is suffering a similar fate to the first one.

http://nisamerica.com/blog/CG2

They also said that the PC version of CG1 probably will be censored too.

[LadyRadarEars]

On 10/26/2015 at 0:39 PM, 6tails said:

This happens more than most realize. The games in Germany, like TF2, have no blood, etc. It's gears and such. They're all mechanical over there.

Thankfully anime is less restricted. They TRIED with Terra-Formars in Japan, but after the second episode, they had enough complaints to go "Okay, fuck it, as you wish."

If more people would just be honest and voice their opinions to those that made the decisions, this would be far less of an issue.

The command and conquer games had to be changed so that all of the soldiers were robots and that no one actually 'died', because during the 90s it was a major faux paus to sell wargames over in germany.

Especially ones with german factions.
(They edited the boxart too to reflect this.)

[Deskai]

Well germany it makes sense cause of of how they ended up

Folks complain about the NoA but NoE is far worst

I mean even for Xenoblade chronicles X, not only did they have to give her much more age appropriate clothing, they age the character lin from 13 to 15...but then you end up anyway finding out everyone has robot bodies and even some npcs talk about how some of them are actually much older than the age their robot body is showing...

[TrishaCat]

6 hours ago, Deskai said:

Well germany it makes sense cause of of how they ended up

Folks complain about the NoA but NoE is far worst

I mean even for Xenoblade chronicles X, not only did they have to give her much more age appropriate clothing, they age the character lin from 13 to 15...but then you end up anyway finding out everyone has robot bodies and even some npcs talk about how some of them are actually much older than the age their robot body is showing...

I believe NoE's release of Xenoblade Chronicles X was based on NoA's, because all of what you describe was in the NoA release.

Also spoilers m8. Find a way to hide them.

[Deskai]

Just now, Battlechili said:

I believe NoE's release of Xenoblade Chronicles X was based on NoA's, because all of what you describe was in the NoA release.

Also spoilers m8. Find a way to hide them.

no, spoilers like that dont really gawd damn matter to the game as it makes sense cause the real spoiler wasnt even mention

[AlastairSnowpaw]

You should really be thankful for your taste in games. you have refined it so well that the only things you find to complain are not having the japanese bikini option available in the game you play.

I have not seen you talk as much about any actual flaws of games as you have this subject.

[TrishaCat]

27 minutes ago, AlastairSnowpaw said:

You should really be thankful for your taste in games. you have refined it so well that the only things you find to complain are not having the japanese bikini option available in the game you play.

I have not seen you talk as much about any actual flaws of games as you have this subject.

Sorry. I realize it is kind of silly for me to do. Its just...Well, really, I care about this subject more than the quality of the games themselves in a lot of cases. For example, there's a game on Steam called Eternal Destiny I've promised myself I would buy since the company that published it was originally going to release it with censored card art, but after numerous complaints from fans, said they'd look into it, and then in the end changed their minds and released the game with options to play it with the censored cards or to play it with the original uncensored cards. I plan on buying that game, and I didn't care about the game before hand, nor do I really care about the game now. I don't know much about it; its not well regarded or anything. I just feel like I should buy it to support these kinds of actions from game publishers.

So...I guess that's a long winded way of trying to explain how I feel. The quality of games themselves is not as important to me as how the games are treated by publishers.

But you aren't wrong; I don't usually have much to complain about when I play a lot of video games, and I don't really like being negative when I do find stuff to complain about. I like talking about games I like, not finding things to complain about for games I don't.

[Deskai]

5 minutes ago, Battlechili said:

Sorry. I realize it is kind of silly for me to do. Its just...Well, really, I care about this subject more than the quality of the games themselves in a lot of cases. For example, there's a game on Steam called Eternal Destiny I've promised myself I would buy since the company that published it was originally going to release it with censored card art, but after numerous complaints from fans, said they'd look into it, and then in the end changed their minds and released the game with options to play it with the censored cards or to play it with the original uncensored cards. I plan on buying that game, and I didn't care about the game before hand, nor do I really care about the game now. I don't know much about it; its not well regarded or anything. I just feel like I should buy it to support these kinds of actions from game publishers.

So...I guess that's a long winded way of trying to explain why. Because the quality of games themselves is not as important to me as how the games are treated by publishers.

But you aren't wrong; I don't usually have much to complain about when I play a lot of video games, and I don't really like being negative when I do find stuff to complain about. I like talking about games I like, not finding things to complain about for games I don't.

Well theres a problem with that kind of mentality as some developers rely on folks who have such mentality. Really many games end up relying on "eye candy" to sell but when you remove said eye candy it shows the game is really lacking. 
When it comes to Card games, I need to see what they are really offering on the game side rather than the Deck side Even looking at that game's reviews, many folks talk about how its is quite lack luster despite it getting positives with the big thing being "not many playing multiplayer"

[TrishaCat]

9 minutes ago, Deskai said:

Well theres a problem with that kind of mentality as some developers rely on folks who have such mentality. Really many games end up relying on "eye candy" to sell but when you remove said eye candy it shows the game is really lacking. 

But...isn't that just another reason to leave stuff alone? Leaving in eye candy to appeal to those who like it, even if the game itself is kinda meh? I mean, eye candy or not, if a game is bad its bad regardless. The eye candy isn't going to change that, but it might still bring in some extra players. I don't think many of the people buying Criminal Girls games for example are doing it for the dungeon crawling gameplay. And like that game I mentioned: If it were left censored, you don't think it would've gotten even fewer players?

Or are you saying that people shouldn't be encouraging the development of bad games just because they have lewd art?

[Deskai]

Just now, Battlechili said:

But...isn't that just another reason to leave stuff alone? Leaving in eye candy to appeal to those who like it, even if the game itself is kinda meh? I mean, eye candy or not, if a game is bad its bad regardless. The eye candy isn't going to change that, but it might still bring in some extra players. I don't think many of the people buying Criminal Girls games for example are doing it for the dungeon crawling gameplay.

as something in the idola clan would say as we all believe in..
"You may need to actually die or fail hard if thats all you can offer to make you realize you need to actually do work"
So no, its bad, and it being edited out is revealing how bad it is if thats all folks gonna get it for and reveal the company is weak if thats all they rely on...

[TrishaCat]

God Eater Resurrection has blood removed from its English release.

I was looking forward to getting this game.

Bamco didn't edit blood in Dark Souls/Bloodborne so why this?

On 6/3/2016 at 0:43 AM, Deskai said:

as something in the idola clan would say as we all believe in..
"You may need to actually die or fail hard if thats all you can offer to make you realize you need to actually do work"
So no, its bad, and it being edited out is revealing how bad it is if thats all folks gonna get it for and reveal the company is weak if thats all they rely on...

What you're basically saying though is that people aren't allowed to enjoy games they like because they're bad overall, which is somewhat subjective. There's probably someone somewhere out there that likes Superman 64. Should that person not be allowed to enjoy themselves?

I want people to be able to purchase and enjoy the niche things they like.

[Deskai]

3 hours ago, Battlechili said:

God Eater Resurrection has blood removed from its English release.

I was looking forward to getting this game.

Bamco didn't edit blood in Dark Souls/Bloodborne so why this?

What you're basically saying though is that people aren't allowed to enjoy games they like because they're bad overall, which is somewhat subjective. There's probably someone somewhere out there that likes Superman 64. Should that person not be allowed to enjoy themselves?

I want people to be able to purchase and enjoy the niche things they like.

Theres a difference between a bad game due to controls and the limitations of the console (note Superman 64 isnt actually as bad as folks say it is, the worst game of all time is still ET for the atari due to it nearly killed the gaming market) and a bad game that that relies on things that are needless and if those needless things are removed revealing its a terrible game overall. 
Complaining about things that are needless being removed or altered is that needless

thats why I brought up xenoblade Chronicles X about the character that was originally 13 being aged up to 15 cause in truth folks tend to be a bit more comfortable with someone who is mid to older teen wearing a bikini than someone who JUST became a teenager but also "it does nothing..."
I have played the God Eater Series, and a lost of a lil bit of blood isnt gonna ruin it as the game itself is still good with its gameplay.

[Derin Darkpaw]

On 6/2/2016 at 10:32 PM, Battlechili said:

But...isn't that just another reason to leave stuff alone? Leaving in eye candy to appeal to those who like it, even if the game itself is kinda meh? I mean, eye candy or not, if a game is bad its bad regardless. The eye candy isn't going to change that, but it might still bring in some extra players. I don't think many of the people buying Criminal Girls games for example are doing it for the dungeon crawling gameplay. And like that game I mentioned: If it were left censored, you don't think it would've gotten even fewer players?

See the problem here is that you are assuming that leaving the eye candy in will increase appeal when it is equally plausible to assume that leaving in said eye candy will cause it to appeal to fewer consumers.  These companies have big sales departments that analyze this kind of thing and they are paid to determine whether decisions like this will negatively or positively impact sales.  I am not saying that they are always right just that they have reasoning to make the decision in favor of censorship and it isn't merely from a moralistic perspective.

If you would allow me to make some assertions I don't think it is implausible to assume that if censorship was negatively impacting sales companies wouldn't continue to do it so regularly because I also think its safe to assume that in general these game companies are more concerned with making a profit than they are with ensuring their games comply to some moralistic standard.

[AlastairSnowpaw]

19 hours ago, Battlechili said:

What you're basically saying though is that people aren't allowed to enjoy games they like because they're bad overall, which is somewhat subjective. There's probably someone somewhere out there that likes Superman 64. Should that person not be allowed to enjoy themselves?

I want people to be able to purchase and enjoy the niche things they like.

they were saying nothing along those lines. at no point are they discussing whether someone should be allowed to like something or not based on whether it's bad or not so i'm completely dropping that point since it was never brought up to begin with.

The point is that games shouldn't rely on pretty shit (whether it be overtop graphics or bikinis) and the removal of such things is good for games since it encourages games to actually be good at being games. Your examples tend to enforce that by being small superficial things that have no genuine impact on the game and thus don't really add much value to your points.

[Deskai]

I'm gonna bring up the newest Fire Emblem game, FE:Fates cause of the removal of the pokemon amie like mini game...

"it did nothing"

Its removal didnt really alter the game much other than certain dialogue being lost, though the game continued to be very good either way cause it concentrated on gameplay.

This is often why you see so little actual folks who play games not care about editing or censoring as we concentrate on things that affect the gameplay as a whole in a major way.

getting angry about "Hey we removed/altered some character designs to make em work for overseas but actually have no effect on gameplay really as its the same game still" is sad, but you can get angry about "hey we removed a part of a game that actually contained items that could help you in the main game cause it was deem to make it too easy"

[TrishaCat]

23 hours ago, Deskai said:

Theres a difference between a bad game due to controls and the limitations of the console (note Superman 64 isnt actually as bad as folks say it is, the worst game of all time is still ET for the atari due to it nearly killed the gaming market) and a bad game that that relies on things that are needless and if those needless things are removed revealing its a terrible game overall. 
Complaining about things that are needless being removed or altered is that needless

thats why I brought up xenoblade Chronicles X about the character that was originally 13 being aged up to 15 cause in truth folks tend to be a bit more comfortable with someone who is mid to older teen wearing a bikini than someone who JUST became a teenager but also "it does nothing..."
I have played the God Eater Series, and a lost of a lil bit of blood isnt gonna ruin it as the game itself is still good with its gameplay.

Why are these things you mention "needless"? If a game's main focus is its fan service, wouldn't that mean that the game "needs" such content? After all, that is the intention of the game.  I admit my bringing up Superman 64 wasn't really a good comparison. I'm just confused as to what you're saying here "So no, its bad, and it being edited out is revealing how bad it is if thats all folks gonna get it for and reveal the company is weak if thats all they rely on...". The quality of it is subjective, and when you were stating this, it seemed as if you were arguing that games like Criminal Girls should fail if all they rely on is their fan service, which doesn't make sense to me as a justification for the edits made to such a game.

As for God Eater, I see it as ruined or at least severely damaged, as it is no longer the game it was before. The game takes place in a dark and gritty post-apocalyptic future where mankind is fighting these great monsters; it would make sense for the game to be bloody and fit the atmosphere. Besides, many games have options to turn blood on and off; how is it right to change such a thing for the sake of profits?

14 hours ago, Derin Darkpaw said:

See the problem here is that you are assuming that leaving the eye candy in will increase appeal when it is equally plausible to assume that leaving in said eye candy will cause it to appeal to fewer consumers.  These companies have big sales departments that analyze this kind of thing and they are paid to determine whether decisions like this will negatively or positively impact sales.  I am not saying that they are always right just that they have reasoning to make the decision in favor of censorship and it isn't merely from a moralistic perspective.

If you would allow me to make some assertions I don't think it is implausible to assume that if censorship was negatively impacting sales companies wouldn't continue to do it so regularly because I also think its safe to assume that in general these game companies are more concerned with making a profit than they are with ensuring their games comply to some moralistic standard.

This is true; such changes can affect whether or not people buy such games, and in some cases such changes may indeed bring in more customers. I didn't mean to imply that a lack of censorship = more sales. Just that the original game was aimed at certain groups of people, and that censoring it has an affect on the demographic its aimed at. In a way, its taking the game away from its core audience to give it to another audience who may be more comfortable with it, and its done for the sake of profit, which is what I find to be morally dubious of companies to do. They had a game, and that game had an audience, and that game was taken away from that audience for the sake of another (or at least that's one such reason for censorship to occur).

7 hours ago, AlastairSnowpaw said:

they were saying nothing along those lines. at no point are they discussing whether someone should be allowed to like something or not based on whether it's bad or not so i'm completely dropping that point since it was never brought up to begin with.

The point is that games shouldn't rely on pretty shit (whether it be overtop graphics or bikinis) and the removal of such things is good for games since it encourages games to actually be good at being games. Your examples tend to enforce that by being small superficial things that have no genuine impact on the game and thus don't really add much value to your points.

Sorry, I misunderstood then.

I'm not sure I understand however "the removal of such things is good for games since it encourages games to actually be good at being games."

How? The "game" part of it was always there. Removing the small superficial things removes "bonus" aspects of the game, so to speak. The game part of it was always there. If I'm following correctly, I understand that by such a game failing on its own merit rather than drawing in extra customers due to random fan service, it may force a company to produce a better product with them realizing that such a title requires more meat to the game. But looking at it from that perspective, then what of those people who like those fanservice things? I took it as people not being allowed to like something because you're saying that the changes being made helps games to try and be good at being games, devaluing other parts of a game that someone may enjoy.

1 hour ago, Deskai said:

I'm gonna bring up the newest Fire Emblem game, FE:Fates cause of the removal of the pokemon amie like mini game...

"it did nothing"

Its removal didnt really alter the game much other than certain dialogue being lost, though the game continued to be very good either way cause it concentrated on gameplay.

This is often why you see so little actual folks who play games not care about editing or censoring as we concentrate on things that affect the gameplay as a whole in a major way.

getting angry about "Hey we removed/altered some character designs to make em work for overseas but actually have no effect on gameplay really as its the same game still" is sad, but you can get angry about "hey we removed a part of a game that actually contained items that could help you in the main game cause it was deem to make it too easy"

It removed gameplay

The Pokemon-amie-like mini game was gameplay meant to make it easier to feel closer to and be involved with the characters you form relationships with in the game. You could "touch" the characters to essentially feel closer to them. Supports, marriage, etc. are prominent parts of the Fire Emblem series. Content relevant to those elements, that mini-game, several lines of dialogue...it was all removed. Character personalities were wholly butchered so as to have quirky Nintendo dialogue that wasn't present in the original game.

Need I re-link the dialogue from pickle boy?

Its especially offensive your statement here "This is often why you see so little actual folks who play games not care about editing or censoring", as it implies that the people who complain about such changes don't play these games. I'm sorry, what? The people who beg game companies to localize video games only to be disappointed by how they bring them over never wanted to play such games in the first place? The people who went out of their way to make their own uncensored fan translation of Fire Emblem Fates don't actual play video games?

And as for the last part...No. The game could've come overseas untouched. It could've worked. It was not necessary to remove that mini-game. There was no "make em work for overseas" about it. And doing such had a direct effect on the gameplay, as it removed gameplay.

I have no doubt Fire Emblem Fates is a great game even after the changes made. But it was also a great game without the changes made.

EDIT: 

Not really relevant to anything in this conversation, but I figured I'd throw this in since its semi-relevant to the topic overall. It is a post by Tom Lipschultz, a game translator at XSeed, a game localization company most notable for releasing games like Senran Kagura, Pandora's Tower, The Last Story, Killer Is Dead, Solatorobo, and many others. (also my favorite localization company). This man is the reason the character ages in Senran Kagura were not changed when the game was brought over.

[AlastairSnowpaw]

8 hours ago, Battlechili said:

Sorry, I misunderstood then.

I'm not sure I understand however "the removal of such things is good for games since it encourages games to actually be good at being games."

How? The "game" part of it was always there. Removing the small superficial things removes "bonus" aspects of the game, so to speak. The game part of it was always there. If I'm following correctly, I understand that by such a game failing on its own merit rather than drawing in extra customers due to random fan service, it may force a company to produce a better product with them realizing that such a title requires more meat to the game. But looking at it from that perspective, then what of those people who like those fanservice things? I took it as people not being allowed to like something because you're saying that the changes being made helps games to try and be good at being games, devaluing other parts of a game that someone may enjoy.

 

People who want to play fanservicey games should ask for good fanservicey games. Games with fanservice aren't inherently bad, the DMC and Bayonetta games are great games with fanservice. They earned the bonus of the fanserivce with their balls to the walls action and tight gameplay. However tons of games just try to throw bikini women in it instead of working on good games since they know horny teens will just buy it for the tits. Which is bad for games and pretty exploitive. It's kind of like military shooters, the bad constant rehashed ones should go away but that doesn't mean the genre should go away, companies should try to make new and interesting ideas with it. same goes for using fanservice in the game.

From what I have seen your definition of Fanservice is pretty narrow. Fanservice isn't just niche kinky stuff, it's also generic stuff like having characters from different series fight each other.

all that being said I stick by what I said before in that you should be thankful you have refined your choice in games so much that the things you spend so much time on complaining about are such non-issues in games.

 

[PastryOfApathy]

I blame gamergate. :^)

[Sidewalk Surfboard]

1 minute ago, PastryOfApathy said:

I blame gamergate. :^)

 

[Deskai]

9 hours ago, PastryOfApathy said:

I blame gamergate. :^)

I blame otakus...they ruined games and anime...

[Enigma]

I dream of a day I can play all of Metal Gear Solid V: Phantom Pain.

 

#FucKonami

[Strangefox32000]

The Japanese versions of Pokemon HeartGold and SoulSilver versions were the last Pokemon games that had a game corner that actually functioned as a casino (and not a game of minesweeper). I get it, kids shouldn't gamble, and these are, in fact, targeted at children, but fucking MINESWEEPER!? That shit was easy.