Topic: Why is NOA going back to their old ways on making Nintendo seem like a baby console?

@SwitchForce I've already mentioned before how I'm not a fan of strawmanning and your comment does just that by not responding to anyone here but by complaining about people worse than Bible Thumpers that apperantly made life choices that are "anything but real values" (man, I wonder what that is refering to...).
You do that alongside being vague af. Honest conversation but you don't mention what those "delusional morals" that they are so trying to apperantly force are. Those are quite bad it seems since you called them delusionals because of it. Not mentioning those tho.
We are talking about anime girls being sexualized. Like, I'm against censoring stuff like this too but just say what we are actually talking about.

See? This is exactly my point in my previous comment. All this censorship vague talk for that? And, don't get me wrong, I'm against censorship. But... This whole thing. The tone, the message, the vagueposting, the accusations. It just looks so... weird.

And, most of the time, anti censorship talks like these are VERY focused on this topìc. So much that they don't care about any other kinds of censorship. God forbid they see a gay in a videogame. 100+ videos on YouTube in like an hour and harrasment to the devs until they "fix it" because that is "too forced" and "woke". Even when those calls are coming from people from the goverment or with huge power. Not a word there, that censorship and cancel culture in this case is 100% fine.

@jowy_sw A lot of the people who are crying about teenage girls not being able to be sexualized in American releases are pretty much the type that also go and cry about games being ruined by "woke," yeah. It's a hypocritical cycle. They call out normal reasonable people for being on "moral high-ground," refusing to acknowledge that the hill they're dying on makes them look suspect in the process- along with revealing their true colors.

They make false comparisons and strawman instead of actually acknowledging what they're angry about. It's just frustrating whenever these subjects come up- but it isn't like most average people lose out on anything in the end. No matter how hard people complain about instances of this type of content being removed, all it does is make them look worse in the end. It won't "uncensor" what they claim is "censored" in the first place.

@VoidofLight To further clarify, I know that I accused them of being "anti woke" when they didn't said much about it. To my defense, the strawmanning they did screamed that to me (the whole "anything but real values"... made my suspicious).

One thing that I can still factually point out is the vagueness tho. I don't think that is a way to have an "honest discussion" even tho they say that is what they truly want. Like you said, they are focusing more on painting their opponents as bad as possible, making a person in their head to be mad at and then complain about them instead of answer anyone directly.
After all, if you avoid all the context and actual arguments and just say that the people against you are just "pro censorship" and not have "real values", that's all you need it seems. But, hey, I would be happy to be proven wrong.

@jowy_sw I mean one of them earlier mentioned anti-woke rhetoric about DEIs in a strawman they were making, so I don't think the accusation is far off the nose. At least for a couple of the people talking in here. I know not all are though.

Also yeah, the vagueness and beating around the bush is what frustrates me. They're beating around what it is that they want and are using the tactics to either pin the blame on the others who are arguing against them- or using points that deflect people away from their actual desires/talking points. A good chunk of my arguments got ignored in favor of "gotchas" that didn't really work because it's removing context or trying to prop up arguments like "this content is made for teenagers!" Arguments that feel like adults trying to skirt around mentioning how they actually feel about the specific situation and why they're so adamant about dying on this hill in the first place.

Since unfortunately although unsurprisingly due to both that vague comment and having seen this happen before when it comes to this topic the discussion has again moved on to accusations of hypocrisy towards most of those against censorship - while completely ignoring my comment which includes LGBTQ+ as one of the aspects that have been censored in games, anime etc. and could again be if we don't stop these mechanisms, though -, here's an article someone shared here on Nintendo Life previously addressing that: https://reason.com/2023/11/20/free-speech-advocates-are-often....
At the same time and while it's probably for the best not to discuss it further here to avoid going off-topic even though I'd say it is related to the matter at hand, let's not pretend that forced diversity isn't a thing as it has been acknowledged also by those in favor of genuine diversity and inclusion (https://diversity.social/forced-diversity/)!

@JohnnyMind Forced diversity does exist, but DEIs aren't to blame for that inherently. DEIs are put in place generally to protect minorities in the workspace. Mostly from discrimination- or from being harassed. Sensitivity readers are also apart of the whole thing, but most never get to rewrite the whole script- and I'm pretty sure it's up to the company to approve what gets changed and what doesn't. Sometimes it is overkill, but other times media would benefit from having actual sensitivity readers on-board. Especially if they deal with heavy topics that are easy to fumble if you don't know what you're doing with them.

I'd say the thing with LGBT content is a case of censorship being misused, given that people who fall under that umbrella aren't dangerous individuals who will hurt others for just existing. Something like teenagers being sexualized however is inherently a different problem- as it enables actual dangerous people. It gives them content to fawn over and fuels their sick fantasies.

I'm one who believes censorship is a situational thing. It can be used for good to get rid of genuinely harmful content, but it can also be used for bad to get rid of things that a government body dislikes. Sexualization of minors is content that really shouldn't be put in media in the first place, so it's removal is justified imo. It isn't silencing anyone's voice, and if it is- the adults it silence aren't worth hearing out in the first place as they're actively enabling terrible people who will go on to eventually do terrible things.

@VoidofLight My main point is that censorship is inherently bad as the same mechanisms used to censor what you're against can and have been used to do the same for anything else, it all depends on who currently controls them - you acknowledged yourself that there can and has been misuse when it comes to LGBTQ+ content even nowadays and if people completely against that will get their hands on the same tools we'll see characters like Vivian, several ones from Sailor Moon and so on censored again.
And again, what you said about teenagers being sexualized could and should be applied also to violence in games etc. then if it weren't for the fact that fiction is fiction, reality is reality and what actually matters is that people distinguish between the two and their morality makes them say "I mustn't do this in real life" (and of course as others and I have already mentioned it's up to parents first and foremost and educators in general to help their children develop that along with monitoring what they play, watch etc. to avoid what can be harmful to them).

The gist I'm getting from one side is the argument that "If we let them censor this very small selection of things, they are going to want to censor all the things! And they will!" Which I'm not sure is correct.

@BrazillianCara I'm not saying that the same censorship mechanisms can be used to censor whatever else depending on those at the top (and that's why we should at least try to stop them now) without a reason, I'm saying it because that's exactly what we've seen happen in the past when it comes to games, anime and so on like the ones I've already mentioned and more - I'll ask it again, do we really want to see more and more censorship like it used to be instead of less and less?

@BrazillianCara
It really is a slippery slope. Just how much if something is unacceptable? Is one scene of a character in a swimsuit on a beach in a game too much so it should be deemed as sexual? And even then who would regulate it to say if it’s acceptable or not. Many of us live in multi diverse countries where many different beliefs, practices, taboos and religions intermingle. So if you say you can’t have one thing that may in turn put another group in a negative light. We here have the esrb. It’s not perfect but it is our system so anyone can read about what content they found questionable or of interest to consumers and if consumers would take a moment of time they can find out if a game is for them or not.

You can’t please everyone. Let’s take a salad for example. Not everyone likes carrots. So should they just remove all carrots from salads? Most of us either pick them out or just go ahead and ingest them as it doesn’t really matter given the actual amount of a certain ingredient in the salad doesn’t affect our overall experience.

I have to say none of us wants to see a return of systems like the Hays code or Comics Code Authority that would do nothing but stifle storytelling and expression. The guy that wrote seduction of the innocent and chiefly responsible for the CCA only saw the common link between children and bad behavior was comics. He completely glossed over or ignored the fact most were from troubled homes in poor neighborhoods. I’m sure most today would agree that was more the issue other than the comics and their content.

Just a fact check since this conversation started about a particular game — are the characters who were getting swimsuits even children? If I recall, some of the characters in that series are 100s of years old and some are in their 20s but are just small/slim/non-busty. Maybe there are actual children too? Were they getting sexualized swimsuits? Or just cute/non-sexual ones?(not all beach fashion is sexual/most isn't supposed to be) I personally don't know, although I admit swimsuit DLC seems unnecessary to me even though I do generally like different outfit options in games.

Fundamentally, almost everyone in anime has perfect skin and doesn't look particularly human so assigning ages is always a bit arbitrary. To the extent that they even look like humans, there is a tendency in anime to make 16 year olds built like 19 year old swimsuit models, 45 year olds to be built like 27 year old supermodels and 500 year olds to be short and non-busty. Of course in real life, adults come in all shapes and sizes (some short and skinny as a board, others tall or busty) and it is mostly how worn out their skin is (unless they are wearing a truly impressive amount of makeup) that allow us to guess ages. Well that plus talking to them or other factors like clothes/do they have a job/etc.

Sorry that is a bit off the censorship topic but since everyone has mostly been making generalizations I was kind of curious if any of them actually applied to the game we are theoretically discussing.

Also, +1 to the comments on not censoring LGBTQ+; that is obviously more important than random clothing option DLC.

I remember when Nintendo used to ask their 3rd party licensees to remove things like crosses from NES games... they've always been fairly cautious about objectionable content. There were even cases in the 80s when Nintendo feared government regulation and lawsuits on the grounds that video games would have negative outcomes on children's learning and cognitive development (a preposterous notion of course, but that's what some people thought back then). Big N made sure to pump out some edutainment games to appease the anti-game crowd, and the heat largely died down. They've decided that from a business perspective, it makes sense to target a family audience for most of their releases, and I suppose they've now decided to tighten the leash on certain 3rd party releases as well.

At the end of the day, they're the ones running the Switch ecosystem, so I suppose they have the right to impose whatever restrictions they see fit.

@FishyS Please see my previous comment. It contains a link to an image showing the characters and these swimsuits, you can check it out for yourself.

Also I think the style of the anime is quite unrealistic, it's hard to compare it with real people. The age of the characters in the games is quite an abstract issue, and in my opinion there is no point in thinking too much about it, because what does it seem to change anyway.
People's comments asking whether a person is a minor or not are pointless when it comes to the fictional world. However, yes, to answer your question, the characters of the Neptunia Universe according to lore, are the personyfication of the consoles and have no age / have lived in the universe for hundreds of years, so it does not competently make any difference, just have a cute character design, in addition, the illustrator of the characters in the series is a woman, if anyone would be interested in that...

@BrazillianCara If you had read my comment you would have also learned that in addition to the removal of this DLC, 3 games were removed completely, and that the changes in Nintendo's rules indicate that more may be banned, or 3rd party publishers will be discouraged and stop releasing games on this platform themselves.

Some people just out the wrong side of the bed.

Censorship is something that doesn’t need to exist in the first place. Enough said.

Ok, what has been going on here?

Yeah, I agree censorship is wrong!

Glances at waifu minors at school swimsuit bath time nose bleed anime and sonic fan art

Jebus, never mind what I just said and ban that sick rubbish already!!!

Because Nintendo is run by a dinosaur with a spiky turtle shell and a penchant for kidnapping princesses? Jk lol. Nintendo is run by people whom adhere very strongly to traditional Japanese values which usually makes them very respectful of cultural norms for the countries from their other regional branches. I think this goes much deeper than just Nintendo and shows that there is a huge shift in the values, tradition, and culture here in the Western Hemisphere and is more of a societal issue than a black and white Nintendo being bad guys here.

That said I do agree that its a slippery slope that should be acknowledged and complained about, otherwise we may end up seeing many of our favorite Eastern developed series being banned here in the West, simply for not strictly adhering to Western values 10-15+ years from now, assuming the world is still around at that point.

Even if it's cringe to have swimsuits in a motorcycle racing game or young looking characters being sexualized you have to look at the bigger picture and see that most censorship in places like China, Russia, and other regions may have started with relatively harmless intentions, but once set in motion rarely ends well for consumers or people in general.