Fire Emblem Fates Cuts Petting From English Version

[Tsun Tzu]

Didn't we just do this in another thread...? About the same game, no less.

I believe the other thread you're thinking about is focused on drugging Soleil. This one is about the pokemon amie styled minigame where you can rub, and poke allies in various stages of dress through the touch screen.

I really hope this was either sarcasm or a misunderstanding.

Yes.

I'm aware that they're two different threads about two different subjects. At their core, however, they're about the removal of content from the same game for, seemingly, politically or socially motivated reasons with the same people either decrying or lauding the decision.

Clearer?

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

Here's an idea.

Make it free DLC. So people who want it can just download it and play as they like while people who don't can just not.

...Is that too reasonable of an option or something?

That's actually an awesome idea. I honestly think this would be the best way to handle mechanics like these in generally all ages titles like Fire Emblem.

 

[Tsun Tzu]

You realize that translation is a socially motivated reason for maaking a change to a game during localization? Its not like there aren't people who speak japanese in North America and Europe who would buy the game. Hell, you don't even need to speak the language to get through the game. I've gotten through three Fire Emblem games that were entirely in japanese. The change just allows them to cast a wider net is all.

Um. Of course it is.

In this context, however, you know (I hope so, at least, considering your continued involvement in these sorts of discussions) full well that I'm referring to specific sorts of social motivations, namely those pertaining to the subject matter being explored in both this thread and the last one.

Thus the sarcastic appeal to recognize parity between said threads.

Now. Off to work.

 

[Something Amyss]

A flaccid giant purple dildo. Its still a dildo, and quite stiff at that. So, basically a a strap-on. The horror, changing it from a big, floppy dildo to a big, stiff dildo intended for strap-on harnesses.

Great, the gynocracy has taken Japan!

Where can gamers truly be safe if even Japan is being pegged?

I'm sorry, she said groping Samus' ass, how do you make the jump from that to dating sim? And what kind of a dating sim has groping as the primary mechanic?

There's a difference?

Because I feel Nintendo should be taking a couple more risks if they want to even have a ghost of a chance at being relevant in the upcoming years. Going into mobile gaming won't be enough. If they continuously cripple their content and don't start making the choice to be a games company rather than making the "Nintendo is for kids" joke a self-fulfilling prophecy, they will surely drown under the competition. Because as much as Nintendo wants to act like they aren't, their systems are still competing against Microsoft's and Sony's and not being competitive will be the death of them.

Hold up. A second ago you were "pissed" because Nintendo was "cutting" games to avoid being "offensive." Now it's just bad marketing?

That seems like an awful large step down.

Nintendo is for kids, though. They chose that path back with the NES, and have stuck with it pretty faithfully. People always try and point to the odd game out, but Nintendo is a kid-friendly company. Or what we call family-friendly so a not to offend people who are my age and can't cope with the fact that they're playing with children's toys. Not me, mind. I don't really care if something's for kids, I will enjoy it without needing to qualify.

For all the armchair doom-and-gloom, Nintendo's not in danger right now. Yes, that could change, but they have a massive war chest, some of the most beloved franchises in gaming, and a ton of outlets. If this is just a critical response to concerns of their fiscal future, fine, but you appear to be wrong. However, it looks more like someone who is "pissed" because Nintendo isn't choosing to pander to them specifically.

That's not due to the Japanese being uncomfortable with penises, erect or flaccid, as they march through the streets with giant penises and snack on candy ones during their spring fertility festivals. This censor came from the fact that sexual imagery in media has to be censored in Japan.

I'm not sure why the joke needed that addendum.

 

[Secondhand Revenant]

I just saw Mundanemats video about it and he seems to take the not so uncommon stance of thinking skinship was removed because of a fear to offend those gosh darn social justice warriors.

Lets correct something here. It are not the social justice warriors who have the biggest reason to dislike this feature and they are not the ones who gain the most of this move. The ones with the biggest reasons to dislike skinshippings presence in Fire emblem are the traditional Fire emblem fans and they are the ones with the most to gain of Fire emblems excellent pedigree not being polluted. When people think of Fire emblem they should think ''oh, that founder of the turn based strategy genre with 13 great titles under its belt'' rather then ''Oh that game where you can pet shotas and lolis".

I have a big problem with this line of thinking. You're saying you are fine with a part of a game being removed because of what "people" might think.

But, who are these unspecified people? Why should we CARE what they think. Surely it wont be long time fans who'd think thus. It wouldn't be people who know much at all about what fe is. It wouldn't be the irrelevant to gaming normies as most of them still won't know what FE even is. Who exactly are we so afraid of being deemed as creepy by to be fine with this situation? The only ones left are nongamers with a shallow comprehension of what the game is who seek out things to be offended by so that they can "fix" gaming, people like the one who deemed a typical anime scene with a char who is a yuri trope as gay conversion therapy, ignorant to anime culture, Japan, just ignorant. They're the only ones left and I'm sorry but they're not worth altering games over.

This reeks to me of old timey nerd insecurity but there's nobody making fun of us left any more so it is doubly dumb.


The thing about sjws btw is that they created a climate where nintendo felt pressure to self censor, not that they actually asked about it in this specific case. That's what Mat was saying. The fact that old time fans also complained is kinda irrelevant to nintendo sadly, comforting as it is to think they listened. Sadly, they tend to not listen to old fans of not very successful series, as history shows.

You seem to be missing the possibility that people who like FE might also not like this new weird petting people thing. That's not even really at all like other game play they enjoy from FE. You seem to not even consider the notion that it isn't about image to some outsider, but rather not wanting a change to the thing they themselves view positively without that thing.

As for the climate where Nintendo felt they had to do that for fear of the sjws... yeah lol I doubt it.

 

[Something Amyss]

I do have a grasp on reality, and "they" certainly are coming for our games. What else would you call it when an innocent fellow drugs a digital lesbian and softly pets her hair just to have the PC police kick in the door like the Spanish Inquisition and shout, "Right, you there, stop that. That's not allowed. We dont want it, so nobody can have it."

And I expect to see the argument that this wasn't forced. That Nintendo or whoever chose to remove these things. But there is a difference between a developer who says, "Petting people is highly offensive to me, I dont wish to have it in my game." and a developer who says, "I like petting people. I would very much like to put it in my game. But I know there are a few, very radical types out there her are quite put off by the concept. I dont want to risk triggering them and facing their "consequences", so I should probably take the petting out."

If the metric for "them" coming for your games is a situation that didn't happen, you might want to reconsider. You're aware enough to feel the need to qualify it, take the next step and accept that what you're saying isn't true.

I'd also point out that this feature wasn't even particularly popular in Japan, as others have said, so I'm not even sure why they would keep it. I know that this forum is all "any change is censorship!" these days, but the reality is that game companies want to make money, and apparently creepy rapey mini games aren't going to do that for them. At least, not in this franchise.

What else would you call it when a totally harmless guy like myself drugs an imaginary lesbian while calmly petting her?

...I'll just be leaving now...

(yes, it was out of context, just done for a joke)

That's actually an awesome idea. I honestly think this would be the best way to handle mechanics like these in generally all ages titles like Fire Emblem.

You're going to run into problems, especially as DLC is unrated.

But I'd also repeat the issue where this apparently even alienated Japanese players (and half the defenses in this thread are SO JAPANESE! so...), and they might not feel the cost merits the apparently few people who actually give a crap. I'm personally betting that i everyone who cared banded together and boycotted the game, it would matter even less than those boycotts of The Force Awakens.

Doesn't mean it is good justification for such removal.

I made no claim regarding that. You started in on this "can't fix gay" thing, so I pointed out that it doesn't stop people from doing it, or it costing lives.

 

[Rebel_Raven]

Didn't we just do this in another thread...? About the same game, no less.

I believe the other thread you're thinking about is focused on drugging Soleil. This one is about the pokemon amie styled minigame where you can rub, and poke allies in various stages of dress through the touch screen.

I really hope this was either sarcasm or a misunderstanding.

Yes.

I'm aware that they're two different threads about two different subjects. At their core, however, they're about the removal of content from the same game for, seemingly, politically or socially motivated reasons with the same people either decrying or lauding the decision.

Clearer?

Yeah, clearer. More misunderstanding than anything. Been super exhausted for a while.

Still, I don't really feel like these two issues are one in the same, though due to the natures of each removal. Also I feel they should be talked about separately. It's also that the news of this didn't happen simultaneously so simply adding this incident to a previous article would likely bury them both, and/or just create massive confusion.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

What else would you call it when a totally harmless guy like myself drugs an imaginary lesbian while calmly petting her?

...I'll just be leaving now...

(yes, it was out of context, just done for a joke)

This is now my Bio. I think it describes me as a person well enough.

That's actually an awesome idea. I honestly think this would be the best way to handle mechanics like these in generally all ages titles like Fire Emblem.

You're going to run into problems, especially as DLC is unrated.

But I'd also repeat the issue where this apparently even alienated Japanese players (and half the defenses in this thread are SO JAPANESE! so...), and they might not feel the cost merits the apparently few people who actually give a crap. I'm personally betting that i everyone who cared banded together and boycotted the game, it would matter even less than those boycotts of The Force Awakens.

Doesn't Nintendo put age gates in the e-shop? I think that would be sufficient.

 

[Something Amyss]

Doesn't Nintendo put age gates in the e-shop? I think that would be sufficient.

Do they? It's been a while since I've powered on my 3DS, but I don't remember such a thing.

 

[EternallyBored]

Doesn't Nintendo put age gates in the e-shop? I think that would be sufficient.

Do they? It's been a while since I've powered on my 3DS, but I don't remember such a thing.

They do for mature content, theres not a lot of it on there so I rarely see it, but I remember it when buying Binding of Isaac in the 3DS shop.

 

[Something Amyss]

They do for mature content, theres not a lot of it on there so I rarely see it, but I remember it when buying Binding of Isaac in the 3DS shop.

Do they do this for unrated content? I mean, I don't know how much content on the shop is actually unrated, if any.

 

[MatthewTheDark]

Because I feel Nintendo should be taking a couple more risks if they want to even have a ghost of a chance at being relevant in the upcoming years. Going into mobile gaming won't be enough. If they continuously cripple their content and don't start making the choice to be a games company rather than making the "Nintendo is for kids" joke a self-fulfilling prophecy, they will surely drown under the competition. Because as much as Nintendo wants to act like they aren't, their systems are still competing against Microsoft's and Sony's and not being competitive will be the death of them.

Hold up. A second ago you were "pissed" because Nintendo was "cutting" games to avoid being "offensive." Now it's just bad marketing?

That seems like an awful large step down.

Nintendo is for kids, though. They chose that path back with the NES, and have stuck with it pretty faithfully. People always try and point to the odd game out, but Nintendo is a kid-friendly company. Or what we call family-friendly so a not to offend people who are my age and can't cope with the fact that they're playing with children's toys. Not me, mind. I don't really care if something's for kids, I will enjoy it without needing to qualify.

For all the armchair doom-and-gloom, Nintendo's not in danger right now. Yes, that could change, but they have a massive war chest, some of the most beloved franchises in gaming, and a ton of outlets. If this is just a critical response to concerns of their fiscal future, fine, but you appear to be wrong. However, it looks more like someone who is "pissed" because Nintendo isn't choosing to pander to them specifically.

First of all, perhaps saying I was "pissed" may have been a wrong choice of words. Just found it to be a bit distasteful, especially following previous controversy with other titles that have been censored or otherwise have had content cut out for international releases. And with the rumors about the NX not exactly making anyone really very excited for it from what I've seen, I feel distancing itself from its current audience would only further make selling the NX harder. I just severely hope they know what they're doing by alienating part of their fanbase considering I've heard plenty of outcry over this.

Second, I am aware they're trying to keep a family friendly image, but I honestly believe that unless the NX turns out to be the next Wii, they'll need to change quite a bit more than just going onto mobile too.

Third, the current outcry against this cutting of content will only grow with each game they do this with. Granted, what they got rid of in this case was pretty stupid for people to be getting upset about. But I'm hearing a lot more anger over this than what happened with Xenoblade X, which I can only imagine will start turning into a snowball effect if left unchecked.

 

[EternallyBored]

They do for mature content, theres not a lot of it on there so I rarely see it, but I remember it when buying Binding of Isaac in the 3DS shop.

Do they do this for unrated content? I mean, I don't know how much content on the shop is actually unrated, if any.

That's a good question, I don't know of any DLC that would merit a higher rating than the base game, so I don't know if it's unrated, or how they handle it.

Given that they seem to be pushing this release hoping for Awakening level sales, and its basically a first party title, if Nintendo really wanted to they could probably just implement an age gate for something like that. They launch enough updates it would be simple to make any TOS edits necessary before commercial release.

Dunno if they would really consider it worth it for something like that though, it is a part of the game, and the assets behind it aren't insignificant, but I'm not sure if they would consider it worth it to bother translating that stuff for a fraction of the people that buy the game and would want it re-implemented.

 

[Chriss_m]

Snip

I don't care what you call it, it was an insult. I don't particularly care for being accused of having a mental disorder. And your "interpretation" was based entirely in hysteria, so I don't find it particularly "genuine"

If supporting the developers right to change their own goddamn game as they see fit means I support censorship, then yes I support censorship. I fail to see how that's so horrible.

Self-censorship needs to stop being treated like something that's going to destroy freedom of speech forever. I've posted public writings for half a decade and I've self censored myself multiple times. It's something you do when you write and release it to the public. Outrage against it is coming from people who fail to understand how the writing process works. Nintendo flat out described this as being business as usual for its localization process. Make something taboo? Ok, whats being made taboo? And what campaign is being held? You're just bringing things up out of nowhere. If anything I'm seeing a campaign against developers being able to freely change their own work.

The Dead or Alive mess? Oh, we're still on that? Because they decided to not export it because they thought it would do better in Japan (What I got when I googled what you told me to) it's censorship? Do I need to bring up the fact that the SJW angle there was because of a community manager whose views were shunned by the actual devs three times? And once again. There was no moral panic regarding skinshipping. To any significant degree. It has no relevance to this particular conversation

Apologies for triggering you. You outright say you have no issue with self-censorship (i.e. an external force infringing on an artist's ability to freely express). What am I supposed to say to that? We will never agree - my liberal values will never be in line with yours, so we'll move on.

And on Dead or Alive: Koei aren't the developers. They're the publishers. The employee was from Team Ninja. The developers. See the difference? You may want to consult Shuhei Yoshida's statement in your continued research, or the recent interview re: Street Fighter. You know, while you research.

 

[Erttheking]

Snip

I don't care what you call it, it was an insult. I don't particularly care for being accused of having a mental disorder. And your "interpretation" was based entirely in hysteria, so I don't find it particularly "genuine"

If supporting the developers right to change their own goddamn game as they see fit means I support censorship, then yes I support censorship. I fail to see how that's so horrible.

Self-censorship needs to stop being treated like something that's going to destroy freedom of speech forever. I've posted public writings for half a decade and I've self censored myself multiple times. It's something you do when you write and release it to the public. Outrage against it is coming from people who fail to understand how the writing process works. Nintendo flat out described this as being business as usual for its localization process. Make something taboo? Ok, whats being made taboo? And what campaign is being held? You're just bringing things up out of nowhere. If anything I'm seeing a campaign against developers being able to freely change their own work.

The Dead or Alive mess? Oh, we're still on that? Because they decided to not export it because they thought it would do better in Japan (What I got when I googled what you told me to) it's censorship? Do I need to bring up the fact that the SJW angle there was because of a community manager whose views were shunned by the actual devs three times? And once again. There was no moral panic regarding skinshipping. To any significant degree. It has no relevance to this particular conversation

Apologies for triggering you. You outright say you have no issue with self-censorship (i.e. an external force infringing on an artist's ability to freely express). What am I supposed to say to that? We will never agree - my liberal values will never be in line with yours, so we'll move on.

And on Dead or Alive: Koei aren't the developers. They're the publishers. The employee was from Team Ninja. The developers. See the difference? You may want to consult Shuhei Yoshida's statement in your continued research, or the recent interview re: Street Fighter. You know, while you research.

I can't point out that someone isn't treating me with respect without being "triggered" hm? If you're not going to treat me with any respect, I've got better things to do. So just let me know if I should be catching up on some reading instead, ok? I'm sorry, where did you get that definition? Because it sounds like you made it up on the spot. Because the definition of self censorship is that it happens WITHOUT outside force. Otherwise it wouldn't be self-censorship, because there would be nothing done by the "Self". People change their work all of the time when they take their audiences into account, I've done it several times with my writing. Writers do this. Treating it like some horrible infringement on freedom of speech shows a severe lack of understanding of the writing process.

Look, you can get on my ass for research when you get the definition of self-censorship down. Until then, people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. I looked up the Street Fighter interview. The guy said "We want everyone to be able to enjoy our game." I'm failing to see what's so horrible about that. That sounds like an incredibly thoughtful move. What's more, the Dead or Alive guy said that it was because of cultural differences, not because of censorship or anything. Some things just don't work overseas, I mean there's a reason we haven't tried to export the Duck Dynasty video game to the east. Also, call me a conspiracy theorist, I also suspect that the lack of sales in the previous entry in the series contributed to the lack of motivation to port it. You know. Because that's what the developer said months ago and no one cared because it couldn't be linked to SJWs.

Also, this is a rather insubstantial reply to my post.

 

[SquallTheBlade]

I guess we should add a minigame where we grope Samus' booty in the next Metroid. I mean, if it sells its good, right? Hell, lets make that the primary mechanic, screw all that action bullshit.

Actually, that sounds good. I'd love a dating sim with Samus, Palutena, Lucina and other Nintendo girls. Where can I contribute to this?

Yeah, let's just add groping mini-games to every mainline Nintendo series. Insure no child ever experience the same joy we did playing these games for the sake of our own sexual gratification. And while we're at it, let's get Rob Liefield to do the art! And Frank Miller to write them all!

Seriously, why are people arguing for the dark ages but with extra tits?

Yeah, let's just remove all possible adult content in any video game ever. Insure no adult ever experiences the same joy we did playing games with adult content for the sake of our children.

See? You can argue it both ways.

My point is, make SOME games for children and SOME for adults. Everyone wins.

 

[Chriss_m]

Snip

I don't care what you call it, it was an insult. I don't particularly care for being accused of having a mental disorder. And your "interpretation" was based entirely in hysteria, so I don't find it particularly "genuine"

If supporting the developers right to change their own goddamn game as they see fit means I support censorship, then yes I support censorship. I fail to see how that's so horrible.

Self-censorship needs to stop being treated like something that's going to destroy freedom of speech forever. I've posted public writings for half a decade and I've self censored myself multiple times. It's something you do when you write and release it to the public. Outrage against it is coming from people who fail to understand how the writing process works. Nintendo flat out described this as being business as usual for its localization process. Make something taboo? Ok, whats being made taboo? And what campaign is being held? You're just bringing things up out of nowhere. If anything I'm seeing a campaign against developers being able to freely change their own work.

The Dead or Alive mess? Oh, we're still on that? Because they decided to not export it because they thought it would do better in Japan (What I got when I googled what you told me to) it's censorship? Do I need to bring up the fact that the SJW angle there was because of a community manager whose views were shunned by the actual devs three times? And once again. There was no moral panic regarding skinshipping. To any significant degree. It has no relevance to this particular conversation

Apologies for triggering you. You outright say you have no issue with self-censorship (i.e. an external force infringing on an artist's ability to freely express). What am I supposed to say to that? We will never agree - my liberal values will never be in line with yours, so we'll move on.

And on Dead or Alive: Koei aren't the developers. They're the publishers. The employee was from Team Ninja. The developers. See the difference? You may want to consult Shuhei Yoshida's statement in your continued research, or the recent interview re: Street Fighter. You know, while you research.

I can't point out that someone isn't treating me with respect without being "triggered" hm? If you're not going to treat me with any respect, I've got better things to do. So just let me know if I should be catching up on some reading instead, ok? I'm sorry, where did you get that definition? Because it sounds like you made it up on the spot. Because the definition of self censorship is that it happens WITHOUT outside force. Otherwise it wouldn't be self-censorship, because there would be nothing done by the "Self". People change their work all of the time when they take their audiences into account, I've done it several times with my writing. Writers do this. Treating it like some horrible infringement on freedom of speech shows a severe lack of understanding of the writing process.

Look, you can get on my ass for research when you get the definition of self-censorship down. Until then, people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. I looked up the Street Fighter interview. The guy said "We want everyone to be able to enjoy our game." I'm failing to see what's so horrible about that. That sounds like an incredibly thoughtful move. What's more, the Dead or Alive guy said that it was because of cultural differences, not because of censorship or anything. Some things just don't work overseas, I mean there's a reason we haven't tried to export the Duck Dynasty video game to the east. Also, call me a conspiracy theorist, I also suspect that the lack of sales in the previous entry in the series contributed to the lack of motivation to port it. You know. Because that's what the developer said months ago and no one cared because it couldn't be linked to SJWs.

Also, this is a rather insubstantial reply to my post.

I was very specific in my wording. I didn't speak of anyone being forced to censor, but instead having their ability to freely express infringed upon, by, for example, a moralising mob. Choosing to tailor your work to an audience isn't self-censorship, it's tailoring your work to an audience. Refusing to explore themes, content, whatever, in fear of a backlash is self-censorship. Fear of moral condemnation causes one to self-censor. http://www.frankfuredi.com/site/article/755

The Street Fighter interview, from which you have cherry picked, makes it clear that they changed the game's content for a *specific market* in response to """feedback""". But even if your quote was the whole of the statement, how you can sit there and tell me that's a good thing only reinforces my point. We will never, ever agree. You have a philosophy toward creativity that says all works should strive to be as inoffensive as possible - that's a 'good thing'. So if we had it your way, we'd never see any gay characters in video games, because that'd be inaccessible to Christians. There'd be no violence, because think of the children. There'd be no sex, because think of the women. Or how when Western female pop stars release their music in the middle east, they need to 'cover up' - so inclusive, much applause. No. We'll never agree on this.

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiBrquons7KAhVG7xQKHe4DAtwQjRwIBw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fstateofmind13.com%2F2013%2F11%2F05%2Flady-gaga-gets-censored-for-the-middle-east%2F&psig=AFQjCNEtit143lGn93CYjd5mqWTV2-Xe6A&ust=1454129932420777


On Dead or Alive: it sold better in THE WEST! The cultural differences and 'what's going on with women in video game industry in the west' make it *quite clear* that he's referring to your favourite Puritan's success in driving the industry into this ugly, regressive pandering to the perpetually outraged.

Finally: the reason my post lacked substance is because unusually, other than a few squabbles over facts, we really clearly differ on philosophy. Our view toward censorship and art are polar opposites and they will never meet. I have a liberal, permissive view of art, whereas you tend towards thinking 'cultural differences' are a good reason for an audience to be denied and that art should be accessible even if that means a creator can't express themselves as they wish.

So that's that really. I'll give you the last word.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

I guess we should add a minigame where we grope Samus' booty in the next Metroid. I mean, if it sells its good, right? Hell, lets make that the primary mechanic, screw all that action bullshit.

Actually, that sounds good. I'd love a dating sim with Samus, Palutena, Lucina and other Nintendo girls. Where can I contribute to this?

Yeah, let's just add groping mini-games to every mainline Nintendo series. Insure no child ever experience the same joy we did playing these games for the sake of our own sexual gratification. And while we're at it, let's get Rob Liefield to do the art! And Frank Miller to write them all!

Seriously, why are people arguing for the dark ages but with extra tits?

Yeah, let's just remove all possible adult content in any video game ever. Insure no adult ever experiences the same joy we did playing games with adult content for the sake of our children.

See? You can argue it both ways.

My point is, make SOME games for children and SOME for adults. Everyone wins.

Yeah, and those games for kids definitely include the games those characters are in. Or did Metroid, Fire Emblem, and Kid Icarus suddenly stop being games made for kids?

I like adult games. About half the games I own are M rated, and I definitely have no issue with games containing pornographic content, but that is not what the games mentioned in that post are.