Censorship! Vile, disgusting CENSORSHIP!

[Zhukov]

Just to be absolutely clear I am somewhat, but not entirely, taking the piss here.

So... Nintendo recently announced a 3DS Metroid game. It's called Metroid Prime Federation Force. Have a trailer [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGu3Xe1uUUg]. It looks very jolly.

It turns out that some Metroid fans are not happy about this. Take note of the likes to dislikes ratio on that video. (I run a browser plugin that hides Youtube comments, but I'm guessing they're not exactly flattering either.)

In fact, some 12,000 and counting fans have signed one of those awesomely potent online petitions [https://www.change.org/p/nintendo-petition-for-cancelation-of-metroid-prime-federation-force] in which they criticise multiple aspects of the game and demand for it to be cancelled.

Now I have at times engaged in some highly amusing discussions regarding what does and does not constitute censorship and violation of creative free speech in regards to video games. I wish to know from people who feel passionately on the issue whether or not they regard this stalwart effort by customers to be an act of censorship and a violation of Nintendo's right to free speech.

Oh, and before anyone points out that the people behind the petition are merely issuing demands and have no ability to actually enforce their will upon Nintendo, I feel it would be remiss of me not to point out that such actions are sure to lead to Nintendo applying the dreaded self-censorship, which is almost as bad as having their factories burnt down by rioting petitioners.

Discuss.

 

[DrownedAmmet]

If Nintendo did change the game because of that petition, wouldn't that just be them listening to their consumers (or potential consumers?)

I don't really like the "vote with your argument" because it feels too all or nothing. I think that petition is a good way to get their opinions across

 

[Fallow]

If Nintendo did change the game because of that petition, wouldn't that just be them listening to their consumers (or potential consumers?)

I don't really like the "vote with your argument" because it feels too all or nothing. I think that petition is a good way to get their opinions across

They are most certainly getting their opinion across. There is not much left to obscurity here.

On a related note, if these are the fans and customers that like Nintendo, I'm pretty scared of what the people who don't like Nintendo are planning.

 

[nomotog_v1legacy]

If Nintendo did change the game because of that petition, wouldn't that just be them listening to their consumers (or potential consumers?)

I don't really like the "vote with your argument" because it feels too all or nothing. I think that petition is a good way to get their opinions across

They are most certainly getting their opinion across. There is not much left to obscurity here.

On a related note, if these are the fans and customers that like Nintendo, I'm pretty scared of what the people who don't like Nintendo are planning.

Nothing. The people who don't lie Nintendo don't care enough to do anything about anything they do.

 

[Zhukov]

And if I were you I wouldn't be so sarcastic over some people's aversion to some forms of self-censorship. If you were set to make a speech somewhere and Mike Tyson came over to you and said you had to remove some sentences from the speech or he would punch you in the face, then you would be self censoring. Not based on any changed opinions or new state of awareness but because of a fear of the consequences of not censoring yourself. Which would make Mike Tyson a tyrant.

That is the impression some people get of certain individuals and why they are averse to self-censorship. They see it less as "listen to what I have to say and if I persuade you to change your opinions your art will change to reflect that" (which I don't think actually qualifies as self-censorship) and more as "change your art in the way I say or I will use my network of like-minded people to wage a negative PR campaign against you and cause you monetary loss."

Being punched in the face by a professional boxer and having someone whinge about you on social media. Two very comparable things.

Yes, I imagine that threats of physical violence from Mike Tyson would make me change my tune. I doubt I would be quite so daunted if he threatened to say something spiteful about me on his Twitter account.

 

[Pseudonym]

Just to be absolutely clear I am somewhat, but not entirely, taking the piss here.

Well, that explains it.

Oh, and before anyone points out that the people behind the petition are merely issuing demands and have no ability to actually enforce their will upon Nintendo, I feel it would be remiss of me not to point out that such actions are sure to lead to Nintendo applying the dreaded self-censorship, which is almost as bad as having their factories burnt down by rioting petitioners.

Well, that part completely obliterated the argument I wanted to make.

In all seriousness though, censorship or not (the word has been discussed and redefined into oblivion, I recommend against using it) I don't have any serious problems with this. It seems a bit extreme to demand that games you don't like aren't made under a certain name and I won't blame nintendo for ignoring them with a chuckle but I don't see this as a problem. If people want to petition nintendo to cancel a project, well, they can do their thing as far as I'm concerned.

Also, what was nintendo thinking. A metroid multiplayer shooter? I know I won't be playing that unless it turns out to be really good. I'm not to hopeful though.

 

[Zhukov]

Like I said in my first post, I don't know how much truth there is to this perception. But surely you can understand why people might feel iffy about self-censorship when they feel it's being done under duress, rather than truly voluntarily.

So if a whole bunch of people were to say, "The Order 1886 sucks! It has too many QTEs!" (which they did) and the poor word-of-mouth led to decreased sales (which I think it did, although I can't prove it) then those faultfinders are guily of censorship by your understanding, yes?

If the developers of The Order 1886 then go on to make another game without QTEs, this would be a clear case of self-censorshio under duress, yes?

We must dispatch posses to the homes of Angry Joe, Totalbiscuit and Yahtzee immediately.

 

[someguy1231]

As much as I dislike this game, yes, the fans demanding its cancellation are practicing censorship in my eyes.

I posted a thread here recently asking whether a game can ever make you say "This game should not exist!", and I said "No". I practice what I preach.

 

[AlouetteSK]

Took a look at the trailer, and the petition (seriously, has any one of these ever worked, or is it just so people feel good about themselves). Yes, the petitioners in my opinion are being reactive idiots. No game should be censored. What it should be though is endlessly mocked. I can see where all the vitriol is coming from, though. After the debacle that was Other M, people wanted another solid metroidvania style game with a good storyline and possibly a new mechanic or three. They did not expect this game, which seems more like an entirely different IP with the Metroid label slapped on it, with the best connection of that being a prime-esque game. The reason for the protest, rather than the usual "Just don't buy it" line, is because they're afraid of the possible misinterpretation that poor sales means that the fanbase lost interest in the series, therefore the company should not focus on that series.

 

[go-10]

well if the majority of consumers feel like this game should be cancelled then it would be stupid of Nintendo not to listen to them since the game will run the risk of not making back the money they invest in it, and hat good is there in making a product that doesn't turn a profit?

 

[BloatedGuppy]

As far as I'm aware nobody flooded Ready at Dawn's twitter or email with the criticism of QTEs and demanded it be changed or else.

Criticism of design decisions backed by petitions, demonstrations, or dire "or else" jeremiads is commonplace in the gaming industry. Spend some time on an MMO forum. The number of angry diatribes and "Your game will die unless you do X" missives boggles the mind. If MMOs and online games aren't your thing, one needn't look much further than the Retake Mass Effect campaign. Or just peek at Metacritic, where games that make unpopular design decisions get score-bombed into oblivion in an attempt to sour public perception of them and tank sales. Or any of the innumerable "We should boycott X developer or Y developer" threads on this very forum, one of which called for Obsidian to get boycotted for allowing the contributor to change his poem. Which was, in effect, "Do what we want, or else". The "or else" in this case being the hypothetical death of the developer.

As I'm fond of saying in order to establish my old-man credentials, I've been gaming since the early 80's. The idea that gamers are some polite and well mannered demographic that presents their concerns in a genteel fashion (Please sirs, here are my suggestions for your game, could you look them over? If not that is fine with me, continue your good works!) is so utterly absurd and unrepresentative of reality I have trouble reading it aloud without doubling over with laughter. The "Do what I want or else" method of criticism isn't just common, it's generally front and center of any large critical push. We just hang a little jacket on it, call it "pro-consumer", and pretend it's different because it's about...oh fuck I don't know...IMPORTANT THINGS. Like Diablo 3 being "too bright". Or Dark Souls 2 MAYBE getting an easy difficulty mode. Or Fallout 3 not being isometric and thus being "Oblivion with Guns". Or flying mounts getting disabled for an entire patch cycle in WoD. The list goes on and on and on.

And really, the "or else" is a pretty hollow threat. Even in the case of ME3, where a polled NINETY PERCENT of players were upset about the ending, the developer didn't die. The old customer service mantra is that a complaining customer is a customer giving you a chance to fix something. Maybe they should change it to "a complaining customer is trying to get you to practice self-censorship, look out!".

The most common rebuttal to "Gamers do this shit all the time" is to ramble about "moral panics" and how complaining about aesthetics or game modes or features getting scrapped is completely copacetic, but complaining about sexism or racism or other "politicized" concerns is detrimental. IE, if a game employed too many primary colors, that's an issue. If a game employed a racist stereotype, that's utterly subjective and the criticism mustn't be allowed, because ethics, and because changing it would violate the artist's vision.

When I've asked people to point to concrete changes in game design philosophy and game scoring to indicate the rise of moral panics as a result of "politicized" criticism, the usual result is "I'll look into that and get back to you" or "It's more a fear of something that MIGHT happen". In that latter case, could I not just as easily claim that pressure on Blizzard to change the color scheme in Diablo might result in Viva Pinata never being made? Or that No Mutants Allowed blowing a gasket at Bethesda for making a first person Fallout 3 might've resulted in every game thereafter being isometric? If those concerns sound silly to you (and they are), do hasten to explain why they differ from the concern that giving Bayonetta 2 a 7/10 might result in a gaming industry that is a politically correct hugbox. Because that's the "inevitable future scenario" I keep getting sold as the outcome of letting someone say "Man do the tits have to be THAT big? How can she even stand?".

 

[Silence]

Well if you don't define censorship to be purely from the governement, this is one of the clearest cut cases of a call for censorship.

And I don't fucking know why they make a petition to cancel it. Just ignore it. This will not make another Metroid exist faster or slower.

I mean the dislike ration of the YT-Trailer says enough, don't need a petition.

When I've asked people to point to concrete changes in game design philosophy and game scoring to indicate the rise of moral panics as a result of "politicized" criticism, the usual result is "I'll look into that and get back to you" or "It's more a fear of something that MIGHT happen". In that latter case, could I not just as easily claim that pressure on Blizzard to change the color scheme in Diablo might result in Viva Pinata never being made? Or that No Mutants Allowed blowing a gasket at Bethesda for making a first person Fallout 3 might've resulted in every game thereafter being isometric? If those concerns sound silly to you (and they are), do hasten to explain why they differ from the concern that giving Bayonetta 2 a 7/10 might result in a gaming industry that is a politically correct hugbox. Because that's the "inevitable future scenario" I keep getting sold as the outcome of letting someone say "Man do the tits have to be THAT big? How can she even stand?".

You might read this: http://metaleater.com/video-games/feature/why-feminist-frequency-almost-made-me-quit-writing-about-video-games-part-1 (All parts).

Also, you make a big mistake in your thoughts: You think of gamers as an entity. But these are individuals. Some are hypocritical, some demand color changes and other changes and what not, some demand no changes, some demand social changes.
These are not the same people.

Also, some people are generally emotional about twitter storms. Take this guy for example:
http://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/3a6j7m/happeningsthe_game_dev_behind_mechanical/

He is not censored, but he generally has a problem with a twitter shitstorm, because it is completely disingenious.
(Some people have said that the outrage about it was not much. That's bullshit, I had it in my twitter feed, and my twitter feed is not for outrage porn).

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

The only thing that shocks me about this is:

How... just how hard did Other M fail? I mean, I knew it was bad, but even being absolute shit I didn't imagine it botch "4-player co-op with pvp football game" bad.

Nintendo, we still like Samus. Just stop being weird about her.

 

[Mazinger-Z]

The reason for the protest, rather than the usual "Just don't buy it" line, is because they're afraid of the possible misinterpretation that poor sales means that the fanbase lost interest in the series, therefore the company should not focus on that series.

This. Isn't that the same argument being made about the poor reaction to the DMC reboot? Didn't they recently say something to the effect of "if this new game doesn't sell, the franchise is dead?" even tho the major turn off was the artistic change of Dante and the series as a whole?

 

[BloatedGuppy]

You might read this: http://metaleater.com/video-games/feature/why-feminist-frequency-almost-made-me-quit-writing-about-video-games-part-1 (All parts).

I read this a long time ago. Didn't leave me with the fondest impression of the author. What were you hoping I gleaned from it?

Also, you make a big mistake in your thoughts: You think of gamers as an entity. But these are individuals. Some are hypocritical, some demand color changes and other changes and what not, some demand no changes, some demand social changes. These are not the same people.

Yes I am aware of that, Silence. Did I claim otherwise?

If I refer to "Gamers" in a generalized sense, it should stand to reason I am speaking in a generalized sense. If it helps, I can include a disclaimer like #NOTALLGAMERS but I anticipate that people are capable of figuring that out for themselves.

Also, some people are generally emotional about twitter storms. Take this guy for example:
http://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/3a6j7m/happeningsthe_game_dev_behind_mechanical/

He is not censored, but he generally has a problem with a twitter shitstorm, because it is completely disingenious.
(Some people have said that the outrage about it was not much. That's bullshit, I had it in my twitter feed, and my twitter feed is not for outrage porn).

I have a completely withering attitude towards using social media to brigade/pile-on. I don't care what your purpose is. This is a problem inherent to social media (capsule sized info-bytes, easy access to people you know very little about, inability to articulate thoughts in more than a tiny handful of characters) and the way people consume and act on information in the modern age (very little critical thought, heavy investment in anonymity as a cloak for one's actions, echo-chambering, outrage addiction, etc).

If you are presuming that my defense of politicized criticism means I'm an advocate of social media mobbing, you are incorrect. I'm simply pointing out that there is this perception that the ONLY people who mob or use pressure tactics to get their way are nanny state "progressives", and nothing could be further from the truth.

 

[Silence]

Yes I am aware of that, Silence. Did I claim otherwise?

If I refer to "Gamers" in a generalized sense, it should stand to reason I am speaking in a generalized sense. If it helps, I can include a disclaimer like #NOTALLGAMERS but I anticipate that people are capable of figuring that out for themselves.

No, but you argue like it. You need to have the same people argue that color changes should happen but political changes not, for you argument to even make sense.
I have experience in MMO forums as well. The stuff there is extremely different from the people arguing against "SJWs". Tone, writing style, everything.
And no, one thing is not necessarily better.

The most common rebuttal to "Gamers do this shit all the time" is to ramble about "moral panics" and how complaining about aesthetics or game modes or features getting scrapped is completely copacetic, but complaining about sexism or racism or other "politicized" concerns is detrimental. IE, if a game employed too many primary colors, that's an issue. If a game employed a racist stereotype, that's utterly subjective and the criticism mustn't be allowed, because ethics, and because changing it would violate the artist's vision.

Maybe I quoted wrong before. You say that the same people claim that one thing is okay while the other isn't. I say that a minority is this hypocritical, and the majority does either not like both or doesn't care about both.

The term #notallgamers does make no sense in this context. Just like #notallmen didn't mean "the same people are rapists and innocent" (at least I think so, I didn't care about this).



Well, the text was an example of how people perceived games to suffer in quality because of unreasonable criticism. With examples, without "Hold on, I need to check this". That's just the viewpoint, shouldn't convince you or anything. But it's much more than how you depict your argumentative opposition "They don't have arguments, they just stay silent if asked".


I could write more about social mobbing.
I never claimed that it was only "progressives". But this post is not about agreeing with you wholeheartedly, it's about finding the holes in your argument.

 

[Hairless Mammoth]

The reason for the protest, rather than the usual "Just don't buy it" line, is because they're afraid of the possible misinterpretation that poor sales means that the fanbase lost interest in the series, therefore the company should not focus on that series.

Double this. Nintendo's been funny about this franchise since Prime 2 was nearing its release. They copied Halo 2's ilovebees campaign, showing us that at least someone at Nintendo is confused about the target audience. Years later, Other M happened. Now, the producer for Federation Force, Kensuke Tanabe, said in an interveiw that he wanted Blastball to get new players (namely Japanese players) used to FPSes and ready for the co-op, the main game. Why are they bothering with a genre that their home nation generally dislikes and isn't the style the original fans around the world wanted? They don't know how to approach the series anymore, and everyone, myself included, is worried how they will react to the sales of this game.

OT: I would sign the petition to help send the intended message, but I think asking them to cancel the game is very arrogant and is going too far. On its own, Federation Force might be a good game. Kensuke Tanabe seemed excited about it (but so was Yoshio Sakamoto for Other M). But, it's just the wrong time for a spin off of a dormant series that was put to bed by a polarizing game. The petition should have been about asking Nintendo to make a true Metroid (for hardware that's currently on the market) or to release at least some info on the game, if it's being worked on. The farthest it should have gone was asking them to drop the Metroid Prime moniker.

The author of the petition might just be going for the extreme to get the point across that fans want a something like the Primes and 2D titles, though. But, this is slow as molasses to react Nintendo we're talking about here. They might see it as the fans not knowing what they want and shelve the franchise again for a few years before realizing "hey, they might want something that worked before."

At its core though, this censorship is fans (albeit slightly unhinged fans) trying to get things to change for the better for everyone. Fan outcry has changed things before. They're just trying what they can since that trailer broke the little patience they had left. (It even broke mine for a moment while I scrambled to find out if that rumored Retro Studios appearance was for Fed Force, but I've rebuilt it and will wait for more Metroid news, even if it takes years.)