Topic: Too much Censorship

There's way too much censorship in games as of late, and even then it's not consistent between games. For example Bayonetta 2 had very little censorship and was an m rated title, then they censor costumes in a t rated game. That's one reason I love developers and publishers that aren't afraid to push the boundaries (senran kagura, Valkyrie Drive, gal gun).

Well, an m rated game not being censored while a t rated game getting censored makes sense to me.

@Meowpheel Just admit Nintendo has made weird choices in recent games.

Here's an example of esrb description for ps2 era games, which is rated m?
Game 1:Mature Sexual Themes, Mild Language, Violence
Game 2:
Animated Blood, Animated Violence

@Tsurii We'll keep an eye on it. If it gets out of hand, we'll censor this thread

I'm not saying they haven't. Just that that particular one isn't one.

Now, censoring the sexy outfits in an M rated game while letting the Teen game have all the sexy they want would be a bit backwards.

I'm sorry and I hate to say it but children today are exposed to much worse in normal everyday media compared to games.

Going back to what got me to start this thread, it's really an injustice to Jess's character. When you first meet her she's is wearing a dress but after what happened she rebels and pits on a more revealing outfit symbolizing her free from her mother and ready to go on her own path as a free spirit to choose her own destiny. And the racy outfits are more of defiance.

Nintendo's censorship policies have been all over the place this gen. I wasn't really bothered when it was small stuff for games like Bravely Default and XCX, but recent games have seen entire mechanics ripped out, storylines and themes altered, etc.

I'm largely done talking about it, though. You can't discuss this topic without censorship advocates crawling out of the woodwork to lambast critics of censorship as perverts or manchildren.
Besides, Nintendo, unlike some other companies, is utterly deaf to the wishes of its fans. It does its own thing regardless of what other people think. I'm just hoping the prudery subsides during the Switch era. I'm really excited for Nintendo's new experiment in hybrid gaming, and I'd prefer not to have discussion of fun games eclipsed by outrage over censorship again.

@Meowpheel Like Fatal Frame V, for example?

See that's a nicer example.

I wouldn't call it prudery, more isolationism. It's like the idea of other countries existing and having different ideals is dangerous, and so the work must conform to the norm of the country the game is coming to. I use it time and again, but the in game country switch from Japan to the US in Phoenix Wright, while not a case of censorship, is certainly a baffling decision by the localisation team. I guess they think that if the game is said to be based in the US, the player won't notice the distinct Japanese theming.

On that note, here's the customary comic:

I understand the need for censorship in some form, but the esrb (to my knowledge) has never changed its rating on rereleases of games. It got the T rating then without controversy. So why is now different. All the outfits that are risqué aren't that bad, and completely optional you have to go through a lot of trouble for them (like the heroes Dragovian armor)
http://www.jagodibuja.com/2015/10/living-with-hipstergirl-and...

Real games have boobs in them ;P

@shaneoh I wouldn't call it baffling. Ace Attorney games in their native Japanese form, to my understanding, are filled with untranslatable puns and references to pop culture that international audiences wouldn't understand. The intention behind the localization was to replicate that same sort of experience in a content that Western audiences would understand. But, yes, the end result of trying to Americanize a very Japanese game is the collective setting fans refer to as Japanifornia. A place where the heir of a vaguely Japanese clan of mystics wants to go out for cheeseburgers after training, and where the justice system curiously bears no resemblance to the current judicial set-up in the US (which makes sense, because AA was intended as satire of the Japanese legal system). Capcom staff have handwaived this away with the proposed explanation that Japanese immigration to California wasn't stymied by racist immigration policies in the early years of the twentieth century, but, as we all know, this can't fully explain the weirdness of Japanifornia. I do think it's charming in its own way, though.

Something like this fundamentally differs in intent from much of the censorship seen lately, though. Capcom's localization changes were made with the intention of bridging a cultural gap, whereas many of the changes made in games like Fatal Frame V and Tokyo Mirage Sessions are only really explainable as changes made either by or for the benefit of prudes. And, for me, this is the fundamental difference between localization and censorship, even self-censorship: one aims at bridging cultural gulfs that would lead to misunderstandings, whereas the other is intended to control and restrict content that the localizer considers to be "inappropriate," for whatever reason. There is a case to be made for this to happen in games aimed at a younger audience, but it's beyond patronizing to try and control what content is available in a game aimed at adults, regional standards notwithstanding.

It goes both ways. My view on it is that people who complain as loud as they do about this crap are indeed acting a bit childish. And whenever I say something along those lines? I get freedom warriors having a go at me for being pro-censorship.

Which is funny because I'm very much against government censorship. Especially given that a government will inevitably abuse that sort of poer. That's the bigger concern here. And if you ask me the more that publishers self regulate the less the government feels it needs to. So some "censorship" from publishers in localisation is a good thing IMO. The more aware of this stuff publishers are the less likely governments will screw us over even harder

Quite frankly people who cry about publishers editing their games in localisation? They send the bigger cause backwards. Because now when I am loud about a government putting in place mechanisms to filter the internet itself? I'm being labelled a pervert and a manchild. Because people complaining about a publisher editing out a revealing costume that was on a kid in a game were vocal.

Food for thought. Part of the reason I believe that the Australian government is so trigger happy with game censorship is because of difference between US and Australian culture. Games are made for the US market. So when yet another a game comes out that's hyper violent or has heavy drug use? The US bureaucrats don't really worry about that too much. Australian regulators on the other hand freak out.

If it was the other way around I'd imagine that the US would have gone down our path a bit more. If more games had excessive language, nudity and sex? The Australian regulators would probably let that slide a bit more. But there'd be outrage in the US. Publishers making sure that the US doesn't freak out? If you ask me they're doing you a favour.

I can see both ways but there's a big difference in localizing and censoring. The jokes in that native japanese for AA don't make sense in English dialect but the writing is very well done for the English localization. Censorship changes the original, makes it mean something entirely different. Recently I've heard they wanted to censor classic books because of the language (Huck Finn) which would completely ruin it as a period piece.

Case-by-case. I'm sure people can find all sorts of examples to prove their point. But as an Australian? My issue is games not coming out at all because a publisher refused to edit.

Or worse. Government wanting to create a secret website ban list to "protect the children". And getting to that point because of outrage from some sections of the community over stuff like games. Stuff swings back hard if you're not careful.

Censorship annoys me. I'd like to play games as the developers originally designed them to be, and I don't like being told what is and isn't suitable for me. Plus I don't like having something that isn't as good as a version released elsewhere.

I've argued about this before, and the discussion never gets anywhere, so I'm not going to say too much here.

The only thing people can do about this is to vote with their wallets. If something has censored something in a way that annoys me, then it'll have a very small effect on whether or not I buy. So far, the only game I haven't bought that I probably would have bought if it didn't have censorship was Fire Emblem Fates Birthright.