Actually, surprisingly, not even that. It was Carrie Fisher of all people who asked for it because she wanted to showcase her body.Morti said:It's just some suit deciding that "tits sell" again.
Actually, surprisingly, not even that. It was Carrie Fisher of all people who asked for it because she wanted to showcase her body.Morti said:It's just some suit deciding that "tits sell" again.
You couldn't possibly have it any clearer than this, somehow I believe you'll still find a reason for how he is "lying" or to misdirect: http://operationrainfall.com/2015/12/04/interview-haru-akenaga-masashiro-yamamoto/RJ 17 said:No! We must keep taking these things like the massive controversies that they are! SJWS AND THEIR COMPLETELY VAGUE YET ABSOLUTE POWER OVER SOCIETY! It's just like how they got a game that absolutely no one cares about BANNED from western releases!erttheking said:Can we just say this whole controversy was a giant waste of time and we need to stop thinking about tits for five seconds?
DAMN YOU SJWS!!!!!
/sarcasm...just to be clear.
In recent video game news Team Ninja PR has announced that they are not planning on releasing Dead or Alive Xtreme 3 here due to how the sexualization of women in video games is viewed in the West. Does this issue ever affect your process of choosing which games will be released in the West?
Haru ? That?s honestly their decision, but yes, sadly, it has stopped us from localizing certain Compile Heart games. We don?t want to censor anymore because we know that?s not true to the original developed art.
That's like telling someone, "Don't think about pink elephants." All they're gonna do from then on is think about pink elephants.erttheking said:Can we just say this whole controversy was a giant waste of time and we need to stop thinking about tits for five seconds?
So rather than censoring their game so that no one will complain about it, they've chosen the path of self-censorship via not releasing it to regions where there might be complainers.Furnicula said:You couldn't possibly have it any clearer than this, somehow I believe you'll still find a reason for how he is "lying" or to misdirect: http://operationrainfall.com/2015/12/04/interview-haru-akenaga-masashiro-yamamoto/RJ 17 said:No! We must keep taking these things like the massive controversies that they are! SJWS AND THEIR COMPLETELY VAGUE YET ABSOLUTE POWER OVER SOCIETY! It's just like how they got a game that absolutely no one cares about BANNED from western releases!erttheking said:Can we just say this whole controversy was a giant waste of time and we need to stop thinking about tits for five seconds?
DAMN YOU SJWS!!!!!
/sarcasm...just to be clear.
In recent video game news Team Ninja PR has announced that they are not planning on releasing Dead or Alive Xtreme 3 here due to how the sexualization of women in video games is viewed in the West. Does this issue ever affect your process of choosing which games will be released in the West?
Haru ? That?s honestly their decision, but yes, sadly, it has stopped us from localizing certain Compile Heart games. We don?t want to censor anymore because we know that?s not true to the original developed art.
Now I just want to travel to the US with a truck-load of Bonbon candy from my home (Denmark), and hand it out to kids.Atmos Duality said:Eh. I can't fault her reasoning.
Sex sells, and some people are offended by that very concept...including Disney, who above all other media companies in existence, has the longest and "richest" history of white washing their products and company image.
(try asking them about 'Song of the South'; it's hilarious)
Its pretty disingenuous to present it as "some bloggers on the internet".RJ 17 said:Or they could have...you know...said "screw all the haters, we're releasing our game in the West regardless of what some bloggers on the internet might say about it" and released it anyways.
That to me seems to be the more interesting discussion we could be having out of this. Are Disney right to discontinue their politically incorrect stuff? Things like Songs of the South, or that racist centaur deleted from Fantasia, or the editing of that song from Aladdin. Those were all things that pissed people off, so Disney obligingly got rid of them. On one hand it is nice how Disney is receptive to criticism, but on the other you could argue it is throwing the baby out with the bath water, making it impossible for people to get the original product. Some people might actually like the film Song of the South, or at least want to see it, but its very hard to get your hands on. I saw it on tv a couple of times back in the 90s, and my generation will probably be the last to ever see it (piracy, notwithstanding).Atmos Duality said:Eh. I can't fault her reasoning.
Sex sells, and some people are offended by that very concept...including Disney, who above all other media companies in existence, has the longest and "richest" history of white washing their products and company image.
(try asking them about 'Song of the South'; it's hilarious)
Oh I understand their concerns, I just don't agree with it. It's the same reason you never cave in to terrorist demands: you just prove that those kind of BS harassment tactics actually work.Lightspeaker said:You really don't think some developers might want to just avoid that whole thing?
Hyperbole. If we did live in a nanny state we'd be seeing a lot more radical changes being made, not downright mundane and trivial ones like this.canadamus_prime said:We now live in a overprotective nanny state where everything that could potentially be offensive is swiftly shoved under a rug.
Considering a collective population of 7 billion people live on this planet, chances are SOMEONE is going to be thinking about tits at any given moment.erttheking said:Can we just say this whole controversy was a giant waste of time and we need to stop thinking about tits for five seconds?
Plus, people tend to grossly overestimate how perceptive your average kid is to sexual undertones. No child (prior to puberty, anyway, but by that point a parent has way more problems to deal with than questions about a character's outfit) is going to give particularly special thought to wardrobe choices, and if they did, they certainly wouldn't connect the dots that it was something perverted unless their parents explained it as such to them (or, more likely, reacted in such a flustered and shocked manner that they could readily guess that they'd stumbled upon something naughty. Kids aren't experienced enough to know what's sexy, but they're empathetic enough to know when there's something mommy and daddy don't want them to know!)cikame said:Regarding the man who wouldn't know what to tell his daughter about the outfit, would he also be unable to explain why his wife might wear a bikini to the beach?
Obviously one outfit is forced on and one is voluntary, but Jabba the Hutt being a gross kind of tyrant is a pretty good story reason for the outfit, how dare he defile a princess etc...
balladbird said:It's not just conservatives. Plenty of people have gone after Disney with liberal causes, too. Simple truth is, Disney is such a huge group with such a wide range of influence that everybody wants to take a bite out of them, if only to draw more attention to themselves or their cause.cikame said:That said, Disney's nigh-puritanical, take-no-risks approach to their IPs is well-known by now. I can't even really say they're being overly-thorough in their approach, either, since they have a lot of very vocal, very conservative people ready to raise hell over the slightest deviation on their part. Just look at the controversy that happened with Good Luck, Charlie... which resulted in grown-ass adults sending threats and curses to a 5 year old girl.
Let me rephrase that then. We need to stop collectively obsessing over tits in really absurd ways.VanQ said:I agree with her. You can't empower women by sticking them in a gilded cage and never let anything bad happen to them. Like she says, something bad happened to Leia and Leia dealt with it and came out on top. She wouldn't have been half as interesting of a character if she didn't face some form of adversity.
Considering a collective population of 7 billion people live on this planet, chances are SOMEONE is going to be thinking about tits at any given moment.erttheking said:Can we just say this whole controversy was a giant waste of time and we need to stop thinking about tits for five seconds?
It may be hyperbole, but it's still ridiculous.erttheking said:Hyperbole. If we did live in a nanny state we'd be seeing a lot more radical changes being made, not downright mundane and trivial ones like this.canadamus_prime said:We now live in a overprotective nanny state where everything that could potentially be offensive is swiftly shoved under a rug.