Fire Emblem Fates Cuts Petting From English Version

[Redd the Sock]

Man, conflicting emotions.

One the one hand, I fucking hate this style of mini game. I hated it in Pokemon. I hated it the Kingdom Hearts Dream Drop Distance. I hate in even in a fanservice game like Moe Chronicle. It's always felt like a lame effort to make sure the touch screen is used and progresses at a snail's pace.

On the other hand I've never liked localization edits. I mean, it's usually benign, but I've never gotten how calling Holy White (Final Fantasy 2 SNES) or letting pokemon characters eat non American food was going to chase people off. Then in anime, it's led to lost episodes, really stupid ideas like DBZ characters being sent to another dimension instead of dying, and fighting the Home for Infinite Losers instead of Hell, up to the more serious regenderification of Sailor Moon villains, redefining the relationship between Neptune and Uranus, and nearly half of Card Captor Sakura left out of the version "Cardcaptors", so that the male side character Syaoran would seem more prominent and it would look less like a girl's show. Those last few in particular left "localization" to me as a term used to mean "hide certain ideas from people afraid of a different culture and different standards." The political sides may have changed, but the lines are the same: too Japanese (which sounds very racist BTW), gross and inappropriate, think of the children, we have to change it so Americans will buy it, etc. etc. etc.

In the end, I'm more on the "hates localization" side as writing that reminds me that I could have avoided the mini game, but these changes has and continues to remove the option for me to chose for myself. I can't imagine these kind of changes are made happily, rather creators are grumbling "damn Americans" as they have to decide change it or lose the market.

 

[SquallTheBlade]

What's fun about rubbing someone's face until the plot can progress? It's basically just wrist exercise.

Because I'd like to see the reactions of all the characters? You don't need to like it but some people will. It's hardly a reason to remove it. For example, I didn't like FFX-2's Sphere Break but I still wouldn't want it removed.

There doesn't seem to be much variety in ways of reaction. Just the same recycled one. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

I will see for myself once I get the game. Oh wait, I can't because it won't be in the game. Damn.

 

[Silverspetz]

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.

It is pointless because there is absolutely no reason to tie the relationship mechanic to such a minigame. It is woefully out of place here. It is creepy because playing around with characters faces just to see them blush is fetishistic and CREEPY.

Some people would have liked it, many more found it pointless or off-putting. Whether or not it "should" be removed is rather irrelevant. The point is that people keep treating this as some conspiracy against free speech when really it is just marketing.

 

[Piecewise]

From what I've seen all people have done is criticize media and ask that content creators think about what they're making in an effort to maybe avoid sexist depictions and connotations that they didn't intend. No one's censoring anything unless you use the incredibly warped definition of the term that applies to literally any reaction to content that isn't glowing praise.

"ask that content creators think about what they're making"

"No one's censoring anything"

Nah, they're just screaming hyperbolic accusations at people until things change to suit them.

Yes, if you take away everything that makes them different they're exactly the same.

What makes them different? Both are making claims that consuming a media product with a specific idea or message in it will cause people to act differently. It will affect their idea of what is acceptable behavior and they will begin acting within the constraints set up as acceptable by the game. Ie, it's ok to kill people or that women are marginalized or treated as objects.

Now, you keep saying that it's completely different and that there are things that make this argument in relation to sexism more acceptable. Can you tell me what those things are?

 

[Piecewise]

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.

It is pointless because there is absolutely no reason to tie the relationship mechanic to such a minigame. It is woefully out of place here. It is creepy because playing around with characters faces just to see them blush is fetishistic and CREEPY.

Some people would have liked it, many more found it pointless or off-putting. Whether or not it "should" be removed is rather irrelevant. The point is that people keep treating this as some conspiracy against free speech when really it is just marketing.

"I dislike it and find it creepy. I don't want it ruining things I enjoy"

I think this is the same argument people made to try and stop gay marriage.

Not trying to compare the two in terms of merit, but the point is that just because you dislike something, thats not a very good argument for forcing the thing not to exist.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

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.

It is pointless because there is absolutely no reason to tie the relationship mechanic to such a minigame. It is woefully out of place here. It is creepy because playing around with characters faces just to see them blush is fetishistic and CREEPY.

Some people would have liked it, many more found it pointless or off-putting. Whether or not it "should" be removed is rather irrelevant. The point is that people keep treating this as some conspiracy against free speech when really it is just marketing.

"I dislike it and find it creepy. I don't want it ruining things I enjoy"

I think this is the same argument people made to try and stop gay marriage.

It's also used as an argument about getting Gak on the carpet, what's your point?

 

[Erttheking]

What's fun about rubbing someone's face until the plot can progress? It's basically just wrist exercise.

Because I'd like to see the reactions of all the characters? You don't need to like it but some people will. It's hardly a reason to remove it. For example, I didn't like FFX-2's Sphere Break but I still wouldn't want it removed.

There doesn't seem to be much variety in ways of reaction. Just the same recycled one. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

I will see for myself once I get the game. Oh wait, I can't because it won't be in the game. Damn.

I guess googling to see their reactions online is out of the question? Anyway I didn't hear anything that implied there was anything different about the reactions. The whole thing just seemed like shallow pandering to people who like skinship. Nothing more. No character building, no enjoyable gameplay.

 

[SquallTheBlade]

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.

It is pointless because there is absolutely no reason to tie the relationship mechanic to such a minigame. It is woefully out of place here.

Huh, to me it feels like natural thing to expand on. Awakening already had pretty nice affinity system. Might as well go one step forward and include this.

It is creepy because playing around with characters faces just to see them blush is fetishistic and CREEPY.

And WHY exactly are they fetishistic and creepy? Have you never patted someone on their head?

 

[Guitarmasterx7]

And yet they left explicit unchecked petting completely untouched in nintendogs? Sick filth.

 

[wulf3n]

Apparently Nintendo doesn't really see the point of including something in its game if it feels like the majority of its audience doesn't seem interested in it. Frankly I don't blame them.

You mean the same reason that most AAA publishers use to not have female or non-white protagonists?

 

[Silverspetz]

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.

It is pointless because there is absolutely no reason to tie the relationship mechanic to such a minigame. It is woefully out of place here. It is creepy because playing around with characters faces just to see them blush is fetishistic and CREEPY.

Some people would have liked it, many more found it pointless or off-putting. Whether or not it "should" be removed is rather irrelevant. The point is that people keep treating this as some conspiracy against free speech when really it is just marketing.

"I dislike it and find it creepy. I don't want it ruining things I enjoy"

I think this is the same argument people made to try and stop gay marriage.

Not trying to compare the two in terms of merit, but the point is that just because you dislike something, thats not a very good argument for forcing the thing not to exist.

Yeah, still missing the point if you think anyone ever said "this can't be allowed to exist" as opposed to "I won't be interested in this".

 

[NPC009]

It is creepy because playing around with characters faces just to see them blush is fetishistic and CREEPY.

And WHY exactly are they fetishistic and creepy? Have you never patted someone on their head?

It's not a quick pat on the head or shoulder, but more like poking and petting them for like a minute. It's not exactly normal human interaction. (Heck, half of my pets don't even like petting to that extend.)

 

[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?

 

[crimsonspear4D]

I always thought that the Japanese adoration with stroking or "petting" a girl's head like their fucking cats or something was a little gross and lotta creepy, but what is even more creepy is how most people nowadays are just cool with it. In my personal opinion, it's kinda condescending to treat ANYONE like their fucking five years-old and not a fully-functioning young adult with boundaries just because it's considered cute; kinda leads me to think why I actually don't believe most Japanese games - or whatever - gives any female character even a hint of self-respect.

There are outliers, of course, like Bayonetta, Lightning (kinda)... and that's all I got right now, but it's just the entire trend that's gotten annoying and no one wants to see a change, tone it down, or at least for fuck-sakes acknowledge that it's creepy and weird to put your hand and rub on teenage girls head.

 

[Hagi]

I've no real issue with them taking it out but it does beg the question, why put it in in the first place?

I mean either they put it in just to pander locally and it's not something they consider a real part of the game. Or it's something the developers did actually want in their game and they're now taking it out.

Neither paints a real pretty picture of Nintendo as a company with products they have pride and faith in. Then again, it is Nintendo...

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

No. Thus the decision to remove the petting game. Generally Fire Emblem is just typical fantasy, and the characters would feel just as at home in a western title as an eastern one. Ike and Hector are just strong brutes (with Ike being comparatively simple), Ephraim, Eliwood, and Roy are knight in shining armor types (with Ephraim being a bit more blunt), Micaih, Lyn, and Erica are all kind and gracious women. The most anime thing about any of them is that Ike is shipped with dudes. Unless you're very specifically talking about Awakening, which still doesn't match the level of "weird Japanese shit" that is a panty fighter, I don't see your argument.

I'm sorry but you're just ignorant of the vastness that is anime and go on to treat only modern moe tropes and whatnot as anime while ignoring the vast history of anime, one that while closer to traditional western tropes, is still plenty distinct to one who knows where to look. All the chars you list are anime takes on those tropes, distinct from the western things they derive inspiration. It genuinely frustrates to use the term anime for only the weird sexy bits and incomprehensible stuff. It is ALL anime.

So its a panty fighter you're using another term for???

That's the official genre classification on famitsu. Kyonyu action, kyo meaning huge or gigantic and nyu being part of the word milk. Hey, a bit of humor is needed in these topics!

Firstly, you can go ahead and think that, I won't stop you, but I doubt we'd agree. Secondly, I'm not dismissing it, I'm saying that it and Fire Emblem are two completely different types of game. Comparing Senran Kagura to Fire Emblem is like comparing Fire Emblem to Dead Rising. It doesn't really make a whole lot of sense.

SK deals with income disparity, parental abuse, orphan life, joining gangs as a means of survival, trying to decide if absolute white and black law and order is attainable, if evil is necessary for good to have any meaning. It shows that without evil, good tends to become the default evil due to human nature.

It doesn't sound like topics the dismissive term you keep describing the game as would invoke for one who knows nothing of it, now, does it.

The point isn't that it would be too sexual. The point is that it would be really fucking weird, in a game that's trying to go for a somewhat broad audience, or at least a broader audience than a panty fighter.

EDIT: Also, something I forgot, these games are largely marketed to preteens outside of Japan. I don't know how well that gels with bizarre petting game.

Dragon Quest IX was marketed to preteens, I distinctly remember an ad which could only be described as a barbie commercial. In that game there's countless of fetish outfits like the bloomer gym outfit or the sexy lingerie, you can also get motorboated (what in JP is called pafu pafu; sticking your head between two boobs and getting it massaged by them). There's also this fairy whom you can pet and tap on the bottom screen and she reacts in what uber puritans could describe as suggestively. The preeteens seemed to also not explode because of this stuff, mostly due to the fact that at that age these things go over your head.

Your definition of weird is your own, you are free to not buy the game if you feel that way, you don't get to change it.

 

[FirstNameLastName]

Wow, this thread seems to have devolved even further into finger pointing territory. As sick as I am about the moral panic over sexuality in games coming from the progressives, can we please make sure there's actually any outrage on their end before we start freaking out? So many people are blaming those dastardly, mustache-twirling SJWs for censoring another game, despite the lack of any concerted effort to get it removed. The claim that the west is now a sexually puritanical dictatorship completely under their control is rather convenient, because it means anything and everything that is removed can now be labeled "preemptive self-censorship" without the villainous SJWs even being aware of it.
Ah, who am I kidding, a game being altered by Nintendo for localization purposes, that's never would have been done before the Dark Lord Anita's rise.

 

[Something Amyss]

I would take it back but if I pull out now they'll touch. Thats not a risk I'm willing to take. [http://www.celebtricity.com/guy-murders-best-friend-after-their-balls-touch-during-three-some/] I guess some guys pathetically feel that their masculinity is so threatened by merely touching another guy that the only way to resolve it is to murder the "offending" party are really dedicated to stupid internet jokes.

You know, I will go far for a joke or a pun.

But I wouldn't do that.

Also, you don't want men murdering one another? Am I going to have to file a report with the Matiarchy?

I'm not sure how to combat that. I mean what is it you actually need before you will accept that content is being cut from games because they think the west thinks sexuality is immoral - when of course this isn't true. A tiny minority of people have all this weird repressed sexuality shit. Like, do you actually need the Government to legislate on it? Like, is that what you need?

I'm curious as to how you got there from me talking about it not being a moral panic and the cries of such being in itself a moral panic.

I'm also curious as to why you'd ask me to assume into evidence things which are convenient for you with no apparent backing in reality.

Says the guy with the avatar of the Pearl Clutching Queen.

More like "says the girl with the avatar who triggers the pearl clutching."

And, I mean, that's kind of the point. Take a mild and rather boring internet critic who says some fairly uncontroversial things about games, and people scream and pitch a fit and clutch at pearls and then she's speaking before the United Nations because she's such a threat the totally not-pearl-clutchers decided it was necessary to threaten her, her family, and people around her.

That's a moral panic. That's pearl-clutching.

Now I'm being asked to give a crap that I can't stroke underage cartoon characters because somehow, the sort of localisation that's been happening my entire life is now some sort of slippery slope to...well, nobody's actually told me where, but it's censorship, and that alone means I should care.

I've spent the last two years watching people unironically recite "First They Came" over video games, supposedly it's other people who are the pearl-clutchers. The boring internet critic lady who explains cultivation theory for noobs is a pearl clutcher, but the ones who take that message and proclaim "she's coming to take your toys!" are not.

The very fact that people seem to be so unaware of just how long this "censorship" has been going on tells me that it wouldn't be a thing if it wasn't playing directly to outrage culture.

If there was less pearl clutching, my avatar would have no relevance. She'd still be an internet critic with like, 500 subs who made bland and occasionally snarky comments about whatever the latest movie release was.

In short...

I just found it funny that someone would complain about people overreacting while having an avatar depicting someone who has made their fortune and fame entirely based upon people overreacting.

Yup. People overreacting to her put her on the map. That doesn't make it funny or ironic. It bolsters my point.

 

[Something Amyss]

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

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

 

[Secondhand Revenant]

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.