Topic: Too much Censorship

Apparently swords were removed from the North American version of Dragon Ball Fusions (3DS), even Future Trunks', and replaced with staffs.

Apparently, after fans contacted Bandai Namco via social media, they stated the decision was made after consulting with Nintendo of America, and it is currently unknown whether the European version will have the same censorship. I should add, the game still has a "T" rating, just like the multitude of Dragon Ball games released in the past where the swords have never been removed.

I'm not even upset (as big of a Dragon Ball fan as I am, the game was never high on my radar), but I find it silly, almost hilarious, how random & unnecessary the censorship is, lol.

@RR529
Breath of the wild will have the master staff instead of master sword!

@RR529 Yeah. Changes like that really baffle me. I'm glad the game wasn't on my radar, because this sort of pointless, ridiculous change would have been annoying.

Whatever one they think makes sense for the market. It's kinda like how on these forums there's a set of rules that we're supposed to follow. This site isn't required to moderate that aggressively by law. Some other forums choose not to moderate in that manner. But this site does. Why? Well probably because the people who run this site want to create a certain kind of website.

Even social media which is the wild west compared to here has some rules. Facebook is pretty aggressive when it comes to filtering out nudity. Twitter is pretty aggressive about filtering out multiple account abuse. Both technically have policies against harassment. Even so more people can speak than have ever been able to before. For better or worse.

There's always going to be some editing and there's always going to be someone who doesn't approve of it. That's just how it is. Because if there wasn't then the entire world would be like 4chan.

To be fair, I do entirely think censorship (or lack thereof) should be another one of the options in a video game. It's just again, ESRB won't properly reflect such effort or cleverness or respect towards a diversity of audiences.

This is probably my last point about the matter that isn't intentional sabotage of the subject of discussion. And even this one I intentionally ignored most context. Like srsly, what am I even saying "to be fair" about? You didn't even think about that before I pointed it out, did you?

For lack of a better word, the classification boards would just rate it based on the "worst" elements. Because that's what they do anyway. If there's an optional mission in a game that's far more violent than other points? It'll get an age rating based on that part of the game. And fair enough. If they didn't do that then what's the point of having an age rating?

Unless you're suggesting that publishers release two different versions of the game. One censored, one not. In which case the classification boards would treat them as separate releases anyway. So this option already exists. It's just a lot of extra effort, risk and cost for not a huge gain.

Anyways, most of the stuff people are complaining about here wouldn't even warrant a change in the age rating. At most the originals would just seem a bit odd and maybe turn a few western gamers off. Having two different versions would be even more strange. Maybe people who are offended by this kind of "censorship" wouldn't mind but I'm not walking into EBGames and asking specifically for the pre-teens in skimpy skirts version of a game.

I'm gonna be the real controversial one and say, I wouldn't mind stuff to like when they censor English dubs of anime for tv when it's on kid's programming tv. Like if you feel you have to censor stuff anyway, might as well go all out and try to go for a different audience like this. I'd buy uncut versions of games like that, sure.

I'm sure it's not likely worth any real profit, granted. But at the same time, there's still kid's programming tv channels around in the age of Youtube, so who knows really?

Probably would be the best justification for making an M rated Zelda, if anyone is still interested in that btw.

I'm literally only throwing ideas out at this point. At the end of the day, I don't really care. But there's at least something to it once you get past the tryhard, butthurt idiots.

As someone who just recently decided to "reminice" about 4Chan...I can safely say those turn of events would be the cruelest hell imaginable.

All I have to say is "Wtf Namco Bandai"

Even with consulting NoA, they were the ones who chose to do this.

Too Much Censorship - 7.8/10

Nintendo is very inconsistent about censorship, no censoring in corpse party but swords in Dragonball fusions is a no no?!

Different styles of games, different owned companies, different target demographic.

@GameOtaku XSEED localized Corpse Party. Namco-Bandai localized DB Fusions. Neither of those companies are Nintendo.

Every company has their own criteria. It isn't always Nintendo, y'know....

@Luna_110
Yes but Nintendo advised Namco/Bandai to censor swords for sticks. With that being said we can assume their stance has changed and swords will be replaced by sticks in Zelda and Fire Emblem.

Swords are kind of a funny thing when it comes to violence.

With guns you can pretend they're fantasy magic bullets. Sticks and hammers, you can pretend they're not that heavy, maybe even secretly rubber-like. Blunt trauma is easier to "shake off" in a fantasy setting.

A pointy blade should realistically end up in an ugly, bloody wound. Although most of the time in games, it's just ignored. And they're usually used against things that are "ok to kill".

Not that I think it was a necessity to remove swords... But I could understand a bit where they're coming from. Maybe?

Other than that, I can't say I remember seeing too many swords in Dragon Ball. Sticks? Yeah. I remember at least one.

@Meowpheel
Yajirobe and Future Trunks come to mind. Still it's a staple of the series and besides that they've not been censored before.