Fire Emblem Fates Cuts Petting From English Version

[JamesStone]

People who think removing some pointless and creepy fanservice is a sign of big brother will never not be funny to me.

How was it pointless? And what do you mean creepy? Have you considered that maybe the content wasn't aimed at you? There are people who would have liked it. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it should be removed.

Is this a goddamned joke? Like, are you attempting some kind of advanced humoristics here?

Imagine this situation: You're in the army, fighting in, let's say, Vietnam. Your unit got ambushed by Vietcongs, and half of them didn't make it to base. You saw your brother getting shot through the heart and he died in your arms. You are understandibly feeling rather down. So your commander calls you to his officer tent and just... pets you. For 2 minutes.

Do you honestly not see how creepy and fucked up this is? How treating the people under your command like fucking dogs MIGHT be seen as a tad bit weird and wrong?

I swear, people who defend this kind of crap because it's "Japanese" cannot be anything other than condescending at best for an entire culture ("Oh, you gotta forgive it for being creepy and weird! It's Japanese! What else did you expect?") or at worst actually believe that this thing isn't the slight bit disturbing, even when applied to the context of the game.


If this was a feature added to DoA: Voleyball or a panty fighter, very few would bat an eye. But this is Fire Emblem, a game that's famous for it's deep storyline exploring racism, war and death. It's a turn-based strategy where the petting feature is completely uncalled for and actively ruins the mood.

Only a very small minority actually likes this feature, the one you belong to, while the vast majority of fans actively dislikes the feature, and thinks its inclusion cheapens the game. I'm sorry friend, but in a mere monetary level, it's not only worthless, but harmful, to appease to your likes.

 

[JamesStone]

wow, uh, 319 posts. i didn't think people were this passionate about games. wonder why we never see this many posts about removing any other kind of feature from a game.

People tend to be more vocal when thinking with two heads rather than one.

* I have no idea how to include females in this joke, but I think there aren't enough women who get their stones moist by this kind of petting zoo bullcrap for it to matter much. Then again I wouldn't think there'd be this many men, so what do I know*

 

[SquallTheBlade]

Imagine this situation: You're in the army, fighting in, let's say, Vietnam. Your unit got ambushed by Vietcongs, and half of them didn't make it to base. You saw your brother getting shot through the heart and he died in your arms. You are understandibly feeling rather down. So your commander calls you to his officer tent and just... pets you. For 2 minutes.

Do you honestly not see how creepy and fucked up this is? How treating the people under your command like fucking dogs MIGHT be seen as a tad bit weird and wrong?

Why are you comparing this to real life? It's fiction.

And have you really never petted anyone? It's no worse than hugging someone. It's a sign of affection all the same.

If this was a feature added to DoA: Voleyball or a panty fighter, very few would bat an eye. But this is Fire Emblem, a game that's famous for it's deep storyline exploring racism, war and death. It's a turn-based strategy where the petting feature is completely uncalled for and actively ruins the mood.

Oh? I recall Fire Emblem being famous for the waifus as we saw in Awakening. The series took a turn then and this was a natural next step. Some fans like it, some don't. Too bad some people couldn't enjoy it.

Only a very small minority actually likes this feature, the one you belong to, while the vast majority of fans actively dislikes the feature, and thinks its inclusion cheapens the game. I'm sorry friend, but in a mere monetary level, it's not only worthless, but harmful, to appease to your likes.

Harmful? How exactly?

 

[GalanDun]

Self censorship is still censorship. It shouldn't be done.

You agreed to self-censor when you signed up for this site.

Things get changed all the time. If all Japanese games that were released in the US with all the weird Japanese stuff still in them, we probably wouldn't have very many Japanese games here at all. If getting rid of creepy petting and a ridiculous character issue to get more people to buy different games, then that is a good thing. Usually when a franchise gets big enough, people change dynamics of the game to make it more accessable to as many people as possible. This is called smart business practice. And considering the US buys more games than Japan at this point, well, you do the math.

People complain about artistic integrity too much. Jesus. It is like it isn't the companies themselves doing the alterations or something.

Self censorship is still censorship. It shouldn't be done.
Oh, and by the way, they left the cross-dressing in Final Fantasy VII. You know, the most popular RPG of all time?

Yes, it should be done. Just screaming 'censorship' is meaningless. It's not an 'I win' button. Actual thought can be put into reasons on why people usually dislike the idea of censorship, some shallow idea that the word is automatically evil isn't necessary to save frozen peaches.

Self censorship is still censorship. It shouldn't be done.

You agreed to self-censor when you signed up for this site.

I'm not putting out a videogame on this website. I signed up for this site so I could participate in the forums.

 

[GalanDun]

Things get changed all the time. If all Japanese games that were released in the US with all the weird Japanese stuff still in them, we probably wouldn't have very many Japanese games here at all. If getting rid of creepy petting and a ridiculous character issue to get more people to buy different games, then that is a good thing. Usually when a franchise gets big enough, people change dynamics of the game to make it more accessable to as many people as possible. This is called smart business practice. And considering the US buys more games than Japan at this point, well, you do the math.

People complain about artistic integrity too much. Jesus. It is like it isn't the companies themselves doing the alterations or something.

Self censorship is still censorship. It shouldn't be done.
Oh, and by the way, they left the cross-dressing in Final Fantasy VII. You know, the most popular RPG of all time?

Yes, it should be done. Just screaming 'censorship' is meaningless. It's not an 'I win' button. Actual thought can be put into reasons on why people usually dislike the idea of censorship, some shallow idea that the word is automatically evil isn't necessary to save frozen peaches.

No, it shouldn't be. It's censorship. To censor your art is to destroy your own artistic integrity. To allow someone ELSE to censor it is just as bad. Censorship shouldn't ever be done. Under any circumstances. It just makes people want to see what's being censored, and in this case, it's just another heap onto the pile of things Nintendo has censored. Strange, considering they put out Bayonetta 2.

 

[Something Amyss]

I'm not putting out a videogame on this website. I signed up for this site so I could participate in the forums.

You said "Self-censorship is self-censorship. It shouldn't be done."

You didn't limit it to games, and in fact were responding to someone making wider comments.

To censor your art is to destroy your own artistic integrity.

Then there are no artists with integrity. Part of the creation process fits the incredibly loose definition of censorship needed for these complaints to be valid. Editing is censorship. Deleted scenes are censorship. Hell, changing your mind is censorship.

Hell, what if you just decide something is shit?

This isn't even getting into the part where games released to market are a commercial venture. Hell, that part's kind of funny, because the bulk of people in here complaining about censorship are the ones who don't like it when a video game gets criticised the same way other art does.

 

[wulf3n]

Hey, just because you buy and like a thing doesn't mean you need to like 100% of the thing. Nothing is perfect.

Sure, but with the exception of a few notable devs/publishers unless there's any monetary incentive not much will change.

Yup. Differing opinions on the Internet. Both are valid.

Yeah, still fascinating though.

Sooo... why? Why argue anything?

It's fun? It's a good way to see if an opinion can hold up to scrutiny? those are just a couple of reasons, I'm sure there's plenty of others. I just wouldn't rank changing the AAA games industry highly amongst them.

It's the lazy way out.

In what way?

 

[JamesStone]

Imagine this situation: You're in the army, fighting in, let's say, Vietnam. Your unit got ambushed by Vietcongs, and half of them didn't make it to base. You saw your brother getting shot through the heart and he died in your arms. You are understandibly feeling rather down. So your commander calls you to his officer tent and just... pets you. For 2 minutes.

Do you honestly not see how creepy and fucked up this is? How treating the people under your command like fucking dogs MIGHT be seen as a tad bit weird and wrong?

Why are you comparing this to real life? It's fiction.

And have you really never petted anyone? It's no worse than hugging someone. It's a sign of affection all the same.

If this was a feature added to DoA: Voleyball or a panty fighter, very few would bat an eye. But this is Fire Emblem, a game that's famous for it's deep storyline exploring racism, war and death. It's a turn-based strategy where the petting feature is completely uncalled for and actively ruins the mood.

Oh? I recall Fire Emblem being famous for the waifus as we saw in Awakening. The series took a turn then and this was a natural next step. Some fans like it, some don't. Too bad some people couldn't enjoy it.

Only a very small minority actually likes this feature, the one you belong to, while the vast majority of fans actively dislikes the feature, and thinks its inclusion cheapens the game. I'm sorry friend, but in a mere monetary level, it's not only worthless, but harmful, to appease to your likes.

Harmful? How exactly?

Point n1: I'm comparing this to real life because Fire Emblem is a series that, in its own way, attempts to incorporate real life drama and perspective associated with War. Besides, you asked why it was creepy. You got the answer based on the closest possible comparison there is:

- Commander and their troops [being compared to] Commander and their troops.?

The troops under your command fight, kill and die. Your men and women are subjected to war, violence, pain, remorse and suffering. Not much different from a real war, only stylized. And how does being fiction excuse this in any bit?
Let's use XCOM as an example. Are you telling me that if XCOM 2 announced today a petting simulator, with its "realistic" graphics, it wouldn't be weird? Not the slightest bit?

If one creeps you out and the other doesn't, you're a hypocrite. If none creep you out, you possibly have a fetish. Either way it's out of place in a game about actual War. And if you really want to try and spin it as a show of affection, why isn't the Commander petted back? And where the gogglebogling fuck do you life that petting an underling or a friend is seen as anything else than either condescending, a running joke, or socially awkward? Life ain't a goddamned anime, and even in the good ones "petting" another goddamned human being isn't seen as a proper "sign of affection".

Point n2: Yeah, and I recall a Broken Base at Awakening being considered a "Waifu Simulator", a term that was originally coined as an offense until waifu enthusiasts (Why is it that this term sounds so much worse than "[Female character] fanboy"?). Some liked the feature, others ignored it, and some resented it for being hard to avoid if you didn't see it coming. It still doesn't have anything to do with the damned point, because what's in question here isn't how fucking "lewd" or whatever the game is, is how the act of petting or being petted is viewed by Western Culture at large.

Again I must ask you where you live that you can get away with comparing marrying and having kids with a fetish.


Point n3: Nintendo's analysts came to the conclusion the loss of some people who would be weirded out by the feature wasn't worth sticking to their guns, which is a good indicator of how much of the feature was made for "artistic integrity" and how much of it was obvious fanservice. In short, even if the damage was slight, they didn't think appealing to the market you're a part of would be worth the bad rep.

 

[SquallTheBlade]

Let's use XCOM as an example. Are you telling me that if XCOM 2 announced today a petting simulator, with its "realistic" graphics, it wouldn't be weird? Not the slightest bit?

If one creeps you out and the other doesn't, you're a hypocrite. If none creep you out, you possibly have a fetish. Either way it's out of place in a game about actual War. And if you really want to try and spin it as a show of affection, why isn't the Commander petted back?

No, it wouldn't be weird. And in that case, I have a petting fetish? I guess I have fetish for hugging too. That's a good point why the commander isn't petted back. Maybe they'll improve it in the next Fire Emblem game.

And where the gogglebogling fuck do you life that petting an underling or a friend is seen as anything else than either condescending, a running joke, or socially awkward? Life ain't a goddamned anime, and even in the good ones "petting" another goddamned human being isn't seen as a proper "sign of affection".

I guess you haven't ever been in a relationship? Hey, I'm not going to judge you or anything but petting isn't that uncommon.

Point n2: Yeah, and I recall a Broken Base at Awakening being considered a "Waifu Simulator", a term that was originally coined as an offense until waifu enthusiasts (Why is it that this term sounds so much worse than "[Female character] fanboy"?). Some liked the feature, others ignored it, and some resented it for being hard to avoid if you didn't see it coming. It still doesn't have anything to do with the damned point, because what's in question here isn't how fucking "lewd" or whatever the game is, is how the act of petting or being petted is viewed by Western Culture at large.

Maybe West shouldn't be so triggered by some petting then. If outright sex and violence is okay, then why isn't this?

Point n3: Nintendo's analysts came to the conclusion the loss of some people who would be weirded out by the feature wasn't worth sticking to their guns, which is a good indicator of how much of the feature was made for "artistic integrity" and how much of it was obvious fanservice. In short, even if the damage was slight, they didn't think appealing to the market you're a part of would be worth the bad rep.

Well we can only wait and see the sales before we can be sure if it was worth it. I know they have lost a sale from me.

 

[JamesStone]

Let's use XCOM as an example. Are you telling me that if XCOM 2 announced today a petting simulator, with its "realistic" graphics, it wouldn't be weird? Not the slightest bit?

If one creeps you out and the other doesn't, you're a hypocrite. If none creep you out, you possibly have a fetish. Either way it's out of place in a game about actual War. And if you really want to try and spin it as a show of affection, why isn't the Commander petted back?

No, it wouldn't be weird. And in that case, I have a petting fetish? I guess I have fetish for hugging too. That's a good point why the commander isn't petted back. Maybe they'll improve it in the next Fire Emblem game.

And where the gogglebogling fuck do you life that petting an underling or a friend is seen as anything else than either condescending, a running joke, or socially awkward? Life ain't a goddamned anime, and even in the good ones "petting" another goddamned human being isn't seen as a proper "sign of affection".

I guess you haven't ever been in a relationship? Hey, I'm not going to judge you or anything but petting isn't that uncommon.

Point n2: Yeah, and I recall a Broken Base at Awakening being considered a "Waifu Simulator", a term that was originally coined as an offense until waifu enthusiasts (Why is it that this term sounds so much worse than "[Female character] fanboy"?). Some liked the feature, others ignored it, and some resented it for being hard to avoid if you didn't see it coming. It still doesn't have anything to do with the damned point, because what's in question here isn't how fucking "lewd" or whatever the game is, is how the act of petting or being petted is viewed by Western Culture at large.

Maybe West shouldn't be so triggered by some petting then. If outright sex and violence is okay, then why isn't this?

Point n3: Nintendo's analysts came to the conclusion the loss of some people who would be weirded out by the feature wasn't worth sticking to their guns, which is a good indicator of how much of the feature was made for "artistic integrity" and how much of it was obvious fanservice. In short, even if the damage was slight, they didn't think appealing to the market you're a part of would be worth the bad rep.

Well we can only wait and see the sales before we can be sure if it was worth it. I know they have lost a sale from me.

The tactical turn-based RPG has lost a sale... because they took away petting.

And to note, it wouldn't be weird for a Commander of their troops to call a soldier alone to their office and pet them?

Yup, fetish.


And I have no idea what the hell you're calling petting, but it mustn't be the same as me. Petting, as in, rubbing the top of one's head as one would do their domestic animals. And this is considered romantic and affective?

I live in Portugal, so maybe I'm the prude (even thought I have absolutely no problem with anything else). But I've lived in most of our cities and I go out often, and I've never EVER seen this in public as anything other than friendly taunting in the same vein one would call their closest friends names that would be offensive with other people, that is, a disrespectful act that would normally be an indicator of disrespect or arrogance being used in a friendly manner thanks to personal comfort between people.

You might be the weird one here, buddy. Even in most of our movies every time someone is petted is a way to demonstrate percieved superiority and dismissal by the petter, either by calling, directly or indirectly, the petted party "cute" in their attempts of [doing whatever acting the petter does better/thinks does better] or showing ironic contempt/disrespect. "Oooooooooh, woook, it's twying to act like peeeeeoooople. Sooooo cuute".


The West isn't "triggered" by petting, and I'd love if people stopped using this goddamned buzzword every time they have the chance. Our culture considers this a disrespectful act, so it's cut.

Imagine (and please be rational and understand this is hyperbolic) a culture where pointing someone the middle finger is our equivalent of waving hello. Shouldn't the person visiting our cities do a slight effort in understanding our costumes and perhaps not give the friendly bird to everyone they meet?



And I must say, again, if this had some relevance to the plot, if petting was, in the Fire Emblem universe, something of cultural significance, a demonstration that a superior officer recognizes your worth for example, like my analogy of the middle-fingered greeter, I'd be alongside you protesting its cut. It's not. It was a feature tacked on for its fanservice value alone to boost sales, and got removed when the analysts came to the conclusion (if it's right or wrong we'll see, but I highly doubt they're mistaken) that the market they were appealing to would have the opposite effect to this inclusion.

 

[JamesStone]

Things get changed all the time. If all Japanese games that were released in the US with all the weird Japanese stuff still in them, we probably wouldn't have very many Japanese games here at all. If getting rid of creepy petting and a ridiculous character issue to get more people to buy different games, then that is a good thing. Usually when a franchise gets big enough, people change dynamics of the game to make it more accessable to as many people as possible. This is called smart business practice. And considering the US buys more games than Japan at this point, well, you do the math.

People complain about artistic integrity too much. Jesus. It is like it isn't the companies themselves doing the alterations or something.

Self censorship is still censorship. It shouldn't be done.
Oh, and by the way, they left the cross-dressing in Final Fantasy VII. You know, the most popular RPG of all time?

Yes, it should be done. Just screaming 'censorship' is meaningless. It's not an 'I win' button. Actual thought can be put into reasons on why people usually dislike the idea of censorship, some shallow idea that the word is automatically evil isn't necessary to save frozen peaches.

No, it shouldn't be. It's censorship. To censor your art is to destroy your own artistic integrity. To allow someone ELSE to censor it is just as bad. Censorship shouldn't ever be done. Under any circumstances. It just makes people want to see what's being censored, and in this case, it's just another heap onto the pile of things Nintendo has censored. Strange, considering they put out Bayonetta 2.

In that case I would ask you if you agree with Trump's methods? He has opinions and he won't self-censor it for anyone's benefits.
You see, your mistake is that you're confusing self-censorship with the basic concept of "tact". Nintendo had the -tact- to cut down a feature that would be seen as offensive or uncalled for by some, and as such cut it to benefit its sales.

Also, do not kid yourself one bit. The petting was fanservice pure and simple, there's not a single drop of "artistic integrity" in it. Not a single writer for the Fire Emblem series sat around the table and said "You know what would really bring out the emotional weight we've been trying to put? Petting your troops like fucking dogs". It was fanservice tacked on to boost sales, and got removed when they thought it would diminish them.


To note, self-censorship is a very global term that can apply to a plethora of things, like, for example:
>The Ability to shut the fuck up when you see your contribution isn't wanted/needed/relevant: timing
>The Ability to recognize when the a specific part of your creation cheapens the whole: artistic tact
>The Ability to know when to soften some punches to avoid inducing apathy in the audience
>The Ability to recognize when your work went too far and admit a percieved error: humbleness

And many, many others. Saying a concept as broad as self-censorship is always wrong is a na?ve absolute that has no place in proper discussion

 

[Silverspetz]

Only a very small minority actually likes this feature, the one you belong to, while the vast majority of fans actively dislikes the feature, and thinks its inclusion cheapens the game. I'm sorry friend, but in a mere monetary level, it's not only worthless, but harmful, to appease to your likes.

Harmful? How exactly?

On a monetary level. He JUST explained that.

 

[JamesStone]

Let's use XCOM as an example. Are you telling me that if XCOM 2 announced today a petting simulator, with its "realistic" graphics, it wouldn't be weird? Not the slightest bit?

If one creeps you out and the other doesn't, you're a hypocrite. If none creep you out, you possibly have a fetish. Either way it's out of place in a game about actual War. And if you really want to try and spin it as a show of affection, why isn't the Commander petted back?

No, it wouldn't be weird. And in that case, I have a petting fetish? I guess I have fetish for hugging too. That's a good point why the commander isn't petted back. Maybe they'll improve it in the next Fire Emblem game.

P.S.: You do realize why the military has all those fraternization rules, right? And that most cases of sexual assault in the military revolve around superior officers abusing their authority to force their will upon their subordinates.

It's fanservice, so of course its presented as cute and whimsical, but can you not understand how, with this in mind, Western Culture could see this mechanic as offensive, and why it is unbelievably creepy when applied to real life situations?

Hell, this isn't some "you did good, son/child" pat in the head, or a quick hair rub and that's it. I've seen vids of this "mechanic". It lasts a long fucking time. This is ritualistic patting in which the troops go "aaaaaaaaah", "ooooooooooh" and "yaaaah". It's easy to understand why many would see this as weird

 

[SquallTheBlade]

The West isn't "triggered" by petting, and I'd love if people stopped using this goddamned buzzword every time they have the chance. Our culture considers this a disrespectful act, so it's cut.

West, and pretty much everyone else too, considers murder a disrespectful act yet it's not cut. What's the difference here actually?

Imagine (and please be rational and understand this is hyperbolic) a culture where pointing someone the middle finger is our equivalent of waving hello. Shouldn't the person visiting our cities do a slight effort in understanding our costumes and perhaps not give the friendly bird to everyone they meet?

No? If it's their custom, go ahead and do it. I wouldn't mind. And besides, WE are the ones dwelling into their culture in this situation. I'm buying a JRPG BECAUSE I want to experience something outside of my culture.

 

[SquallTheBlade]

Let's use XCOM as an example. Are you telling me that if XCOM 2 announced today a petting simulator, with its "realistic" graphics, it wouldn't be weird? Not the slightest bit?

If one creeps you out and the other doesn't, you're a hypocrite. If none creep you out, you possibly have a fetish. Either way it's out of place in a game about actual War. And if you really want to try and spin it as a show of affection, why isn't the Commander petted back?

No, it wouldn't be weird. And in that case, I have a petting fetish? I guess I have fetish for hugging too. That's a good point why the commander isn't petted back. Maybe they'll improve it in the next Fire Emblem game.

P.S.: You do realize why the military has all those fraternization rules, right? And that most cases of sexual assault in the military revolve around superior officers abusing their authority to force their will upon their subordinates.

It's fanservice, so of course its presented as cute and whimsical, but can you not understand how, with this in mind, Western Culture could see this mechanic as offensive, and why it is unbelievably creepy when applied to real life situations?

That is why I don't compare it to real life. Fiction is fiction. It's something outside of reality. I don't mix the two. Fiction for me is about fun and enjoyment and experiencing something I couldn't do in reality.

 

[JamesStone]

The West isn't "triggered" by petting, and I'd love if people stopped using this goddamned buzzword every time they have the chance. Our culture considers this a disrespectful act, so it's cut.

West, and pretty much everyone else too, considers murder a disrespectful act yet it's not cut. What's the difference here actually?

Imagine (and please be rational and understand this is hyperbolic) a culture where pointing someone the middle finger is our equivalent of waving hello. Shouldn't the person visiting our cities do a slight effort in understanding our costumes and perhaps not give the friendly bird to everyone they meet?

No? If it's their custom, go ahead and do it. I wouldn't mind. And besides, WE are the ones dwelling into their culture in this situation. I'm buying a JRPG BECAUSE I want to experience something outside of my culture.

~


BECAUSE MURDER ISN'T TREATED LIKE A GOOD FUCKING THING. HOW HARD IS THIS BASIC CONCEPT TO UNDERSTAND?! WAR IS NOT TREATED AS A FUCKING JOKE OR A WALK IN THE PARK!

There are actually VERY FEW GAMES where everyone's having a jolly good time murdering the shit around them. Even the games that can and ARE considered "murder fetishes", like your Prototypes and the like, have civilians and weak enough enemies running scared for their lives and begging whatever god to save them. The player himself is having fun, but the characters that suffer the consequences of the PC and allies' actions (AND HELL, SOMETIMES EVEN THE PC AND ALLIES) aren't enjoying it! MURDER IS NOT CUT BECAUSE IT IS NOT ENDORSED BY THE GAMES PORTRATING IT.

And guess what? Those who do don't sell well in Japan, maybe because it's a completely different culture with different values. Some cut things out too, like Fallout 3, which cut the option to detonate the atomic bomb on Megaton and renamed the Fat Man in fear of offending sensibilities. Resident Evil 4, No More Heroes 1 and 2, and go see a fucking wiki if you want to see others. They cut overly gory things down BECAUSE IT DOESN'T APPEAL TO THEIR AUDIENCE, AND THE FEW PEOPLE WHO DO LIKE THAT SORT OF THING AREN'T ENOUGH TO COUNTER THE TREND, much like happens here with FE:Fates.


And in the end, it's still a dumbshit comparison. No one calls the Commander out for it, everyone loves it, no one talks about it later. It's a tacked-on cheap fanservice wankfest that's added for no other purpose than fetishing the characters and wouldn't be well recieved in the West (so think the analysts, at least).

 

[SquallTheBlade]

BECAUSE MURDER ISN'T TREATED LIKE A GOOD FUCKING THING. HOW HARD IS THIS BASIC CONCEPT TO UNDERSTAND?! WAR IS NOT TREATED AS A FUCKING JOKE OR A WALK IN THE PARK!

Yet, I see it justified many many times in fiction. My point was that you should be able to depict ANYTHING in fiction, either as good thing or bad thing. It shouldn't matter. It's still just fiction.

There are actually VERY FEW GAMES where everyone's having a jolly good time murdering the shit around them. Even the games that can and ARE considered "murder fetishes", like your Prototypes and the like, have civilians and weak enough enemies running scared for their lives and begging whatever god to save them. The player himself is having fun, but the characters that suffer the consequences of the PC and allies' actions (AND HELL, SOMETIMES EVEN THE PC AND ALLIES) aren't enjoying it! MURDER IS NOT CUT BECAUSE IT IS NOT ENDORSED BY THE GAMES PORTRATING IT.

There are many games that do just that. And they are okay! It's fine! It's just fiction.

And in the end, it's still a dumbshit comparison. No one calls the Commander out for it, everyone loves it, no one talks about it later. It's a tacked-on cheap fanservice wankfest that's added for no other purpose than fetishing the characters and wouldn't be well recieved in the West (so think the analysts, at least).

So it's just simply fun for those who like it? I think that kind of purpose is enough to justify its existence.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

So it's just simply fun for those who like it? I think that kind of purpose is enough to justify its existence.

Of course it's fun for people who like it. The first rules of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club.

Is the number of people who like it greater than the number of people who'll not buy the game because of it? Or won't buy the next game having been put off by this one?

 

[Erttheking]

The West isn't "triggered" by petting, and I'd love if people stopped using this goddamned buzzword every time they have the chance. Our culture considers this a disrespectful act, so it's cut.

West, and pretty much everyone else too, considers murder a disrespectful act yet it's not cut. What's the difference here actually?

Imagine (and please be rational and understand this is hyperbolic) a culture where pointing someone the middle finger is our equivalent of waving hello. Shouldn't the person visiting our cities do a slight effort in understanding our costumes and perhaps not give the friendly bird to everyone they meet?

No? If it's their custom, go ahead and do it. I wouldn't mind. And besides, WE are the ones dwelling into their culture in this situation. I'm buying a JRPG BECAUSE I want to experience something outside of my culture.

What murder? Murder is defined as the unlawful killing of someone. The killing of soldiers by other soldiers on the battlefield is many things. Unlawful is not one of them. Words mean things, you can't just use them whenever you want.

You wouldn't mind if someone flipped you off? I doubt it. And even if this was true I imagine that you, once again, are in the minority on this one.

And for your comment about separating fiction and reality, that doesn't work. Fiction is based on reality. Anytime fiction breaks away from reality, it needs willing suspension of disbelief. If the writing isn't up to par, if it doesn't fit within the world that the writers have created, if it doesn't fit the characters, then the willing suspension of disbelief collapses. For many people, this petting smashed the willing suspension of disbelief with a warhammer.

 

[sumanoskae]

This feature doesn't sound particularly important, but it also doesn't sound like there's anything about it that warrants cutting. Seems like yet another case of Nintendo not quite grasping the subtleties of western culture.

On a side note, all of this has made me curios about just how different the Japanese relationship with homosexuality is from our own.