Topic: Binding of Isaac still has a chance, apparently

@rayword45: I have no control over site content, so there really isn't anything I can do with your 'pointer', I'm afraid.

Everyone go play kirby and be happy!

@rayword45: The link in my last post was the store page and under "About the Game" it states the following:

The Basement Collection is a compilation of 9 award winning indie games by Edmund McMillen, creator of Super Meat Boy and The Binding of Isaac. All of the games featured in the collection have been revamped and updated, featuring bonus chapters, new music, art and other extras.

I'm not sure what causes it, but I think if you have either SMB and/or TBoI, you get a 30% discount on The Basement Collection as well.

@Waltz: Nintendo is a video game company, a major corporation. Their only 'moral obligation' is to their shareholders and investors, period. They're taking the steps they feel are necessary to preserve their image and userbase by making the decision to allow production of this game here and not that game there, as would any other company faced with such a set of choices. Nintendo has never purported to allow every single game submitted to them to be produced for their system(s). It's not like these guys were given a 3DS devkit, wrote the game specifically for this system, were told that their ideas were great and wonderful and oh yes we'll totally release this and then right as it came time to do so shot 'em down cold.

For the third and final time, you would have a point if there were absolutely, positively no other route for the tBoI devs to take with their game, but that's not the issue here at all. The game is already out for a major distribution service. People have downloaded the hell out of it, are probably downloading it now, are more than likely firing it up to go at it again with all the controversy one of these articles inevitably stirs up. You're not barred in any way from playing this game right now, you just (probably) won't be playing it on a Nintendo console. You have the option to buy a console or a computer that will play the game, though, just like how you have the right to patronize any other storefront that does or does not carry an item you want to purchase, a movie theater that will or won't carry a movie you want to see, a restaurant that does or doesn't serve a food you want to eat. you're getting soapboxy over nothing.

Out of all people to understand this... ._. There shouldn't even be a debate.

Actually we get some pretty out there adult content games for Nintendo consoles in Japan. This game would only really see release in the west anyway (STILL waiting on VVVVVV after all this time). It's usually not the religious content that gets people riled up in Japan anyway, nor violence or sex. These days the only thing I've seen really get censored was anything disaster/earthquake/peril related, but I can understand that I guess. A lot of my favorite shows were put on hiatus/cancelled, as were come upcoming games. But that happened after 9/11 in the states as well.

It was always NOA/NOE that censored religious references in Japanese games for the longest time anyway.

I think even in Japan, Nintendo has a family friendly image, but I don't see people get a panicky when more mature games DO come out. I was still surprised at the cover for Senran Kagura Burst though.

Anyway, as for The Binding of Issac, I read a synopsis of the game when Nintendo first rejected it. It didn't really sound like it would appeal to me. I can't remember what it was, but there was some plot point that I found offensive. I'll have to look into it again.

True. It just depends on what is considered controversial content by the general public. Like you said, religion, violence and sexual content isn't a problem in Japan. While it is overseas. It just depends on the problems in that specific area.

For the record, I agree with theblackdragon. Nintendo is a business, their main duty is to turn a profit. It's the same reason we likely will never see any of the EarthBound/Mother games in the West, they'd very likely get sued upon their re-release, it's just not financially worth it. They can and should at all costs avoid publishing controversial games such as The Binding of Isaac if its release could also negatively affect Nintendo's public image. ...and this is coming from a person that likes The Binding of Isaac!

While I don't disagree that Nintendo has a moral obligation to its shareholders, and it needs to protect itself and its userbase, that is not its only moral obligation at all.

Nintendo has a moral obligation to act responsibly as a corporation within the countries it operates within. Most of those countries happen to hold the concept of freedom of expression quite dearly. It's legal, but not moral to say "well, this here game that is totally approved for sale we're going to ban, but you can get it from somewhere else," because that's not standing for freedom of expression - that's deliberately giving it the finger.

If there were ten newspapers, and nine of them deliberately censored an important bit of news for commercial reasons, it would still not be acceptable "because you can read it at the other newspaper." Censorship for commercial reasons leaves a very bad taste in my mouth. I left a job because of it once, and I'd do it again. It is absolutely critical that we support the creative arts and the ability for the creative arts to be transgressive - this is a fundamental western value, and the corporations that operate in that environment do have a moral obligation to support that value, IMO.

I had heard that the real reason that Nintendo had turned down The Binding of Isaac the first time was actually related to it failing the quality assurance process - ie it was broken. Now that I can totally get behind and I'm all for Nintendo protecting its users from broken games. I don't see how anyone can justify censorship of content though - that's not what western society stands for.

For the third and final time, you would have a point if there were absolutely, positively no other route for the tBoI devs to take with their game, but that's not the issue here at all. The game is already out for a major distribution service. People have downloaded the hell out of it, are probably downloading it now, are more than likely firing it up to go at it again with all the controversy one of these articles inevitably stirs up. You're not barred in any way from playing this game right now, you just (probably) won't be playing it on a Nintendo console. You have the option to buy a console or a computer that will play the game, though, just like how you have the right to patronize any other storefront that does or does not carry an item you want to purchase, a movie theater that will or won't carry a movie you want to see, a restaurant that does or doesn't serve a food you want to eat. you're getting soapboxy over nothing.

It's actually been turned down on both Microsoft and Sony, and I suspect Apple (since it's not there yet either). They're all equally at fault here, and I'm honestly amazed that people on this forum are comfortable with the idea of commercial interests having power over creative censorship. I don't generally like slippery slope arguments, but this is extremely thin ice to be walking on.

It's not like anyone is missing the fantastic experience of playing it on the little 3DS screen anyways.

all right, i'm done for the night. I look forward to you eventually acting on all these moral convictions of yours, then, Waltz. All this hot air is fine and good, but let's see you back it up by refusing to purchase any more Nintendo products until they take on your personal moral compass — money talks, after all. Stop giving any to them if you don't like what they're doing.

Don't worry — i'm prepared to wait.

Wii U version, then?

If we get to kill a Zombified Queen in ZombiU then... Maybe.

There's a big difference between having a debate because it's an interesting topic (censorship and business, for instance), and actually caring enough about a topic to actively campaign against it (Remington has never got any money out of me).

I'm... sorry... for having a discussion and getting other people's ideas? As I said, the response surprised me. I tend to get curious when I get surprised.

If it helps, remember I was on debate teams through my school years. I had some grand old arguments over completely trivial topics

If we get to kill a Zombified Queen in ZombiU then... Maybe.

Unlockable minigame in ZombiU. Nintendo would never dare block it then, not after all the work they did showing off ZombiU at E3

So yea, anyways, I don't think The Binding of Isaac will be coming out for the 3DS, at least not in its current form. I wonder if they're going to release it like what id did with Wolfenstein and Super Noah's Ark 3D for the Super Nintendo.

By making a 3DS game card with a slot to place another 3DS game card on top of it?*

*Method used by the totally not Nintendo-Approved Noah's Ark 3D (and others) to bypass the SNES security system and make the thing think the game is original.

@Morphtroid: No, I mean by replacing all the sprites with family friendly ones...like maybe Isaac shooting out hearts instead of tears or vomiting rainbows at unicorns and leprechauns and stuff until they fall asleep.

@syko: . they'd have to go about it all backwards, though, since tBoI is already based on a story from the Bible. a Wolfenstein-based roguelike would be pretty hilarious, I think, especially with the reference to the Super Noah's Ark 3D incident :3

I'd buy that. It would be hilarious.

Why does it surprise you that something draws controversy just because something worse exists in another medium?
Controversial issues dont get disregarded just because something more so may exist elsewhere.
Movies like The Human Centipede are banned in various countries - not widely accepted, and games like The Binding of Isaac dont need to be either.

No, no they really dont.
Nintendo are free to decide what is fit for their platforms - by both game quality and content.
Just to go back to your other example - films can be banned or required to have scenes removed before they are accepted for viewing in certain countries. Just because one country accepted the film doesnt mean another one has to, or that it has a 'moral obligation' to do so - that's just ridiculous.