Fire Emblem Fates Cuts Petting From English Version

[Erttheking]

Snip

You said that they're not being forced to censor, just that an outside force is infringing on their ability to speak freely? That sounds like force to me. And here's the thing. If someone chooses to change their own work, it can be of their own free will. Well according to half of the people in this thread, tailoring your game to your audience is self censorship. I agree, but I also think there's nothing wrong with that, and people seem to disagree with me. Well in order for this to be that, you need something concrete that this was done out of fear. And considering Nintendo described this as business as usual and there was no real organized outcry against the skinshipping, I don't really see how this is the case.

Responding to feedback? Once again, I fail to see how that is so terrible. Because no matter """""""how""""""" """"""many"""""" """"""quotations"""""""" you put up, you can't make the feedback they chose to respond to invalid. What point is that? That listening to feedback and trying to make it that your game can be enjoyed by everyone is a bad thing? Because I fail to see how they were forced into this. Did I say that? Where did I say that? You know what I think? That artists should be allowed to do what they want. And in these situations, artists are doing what they want. People can disagree with them if they want to, and aritsts can change their mind. Don't put words in my mouth. Oh don't talk about what would happen if I had things "my way", the only thing you have to offer there is a strawman argument. I don't know how we can agree on something when you aren't responding to the arguments I actually made and are instead making some up. Which is, again a strawman argument.

The first one did. Which was an xbox exclusive, a console that did horribly in the east. Once it stopped being exclusive, sales favored the east. If that's the only thing keeping sales greater in the west then that doesn't speak very highly of the game.

Yeah, but you clearly can reply in length, as shown here. Not really. You think censorship is always bad and I think it's ok when the artist wants to do it. Bit of ways to go before we hit polar opposite. "Denied" stop putting words in my mouth. I never said that anywhere. Do I need to keep a list of all the arguments you've attributed to me that I never bloody said? "Creator can't express themselves as they wish," how many times do I have to say that artists change their work all the time and its part of the process? Or are you just ignoring me now?

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

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.

I'm not missing this, rather, I outright dismiss it due to it making no sense. A petting minigame won't fundamentally change what FE is. Aso, the concern I responded to was about other people thinking this, presumably ones ignorant enough to assume that fe is all about petting people, despite the petting being an optional thing which even when you opt in for doesn't make up 0.01% of your total time with the game. It would make no sense if someone thought the game is now suddenly all about this stuff.

This is like removing hookers from gta cause there's nonfans of it who surmise it as that game where you kill hookers after sleeping with them. Ignorance doesn't get to matter thus. We don't change stuff based on what people who don't know anything may think.


Lastly, I was simply explaining the point of the vdeo, I wasn't saying I necessarily beliefed it to be accurate, though there's a cernel of truth I think.

 

[Chriss_m]

Snip

You said that they're not being forced to censor, just that an outside force is infringing on their ability to speak freely? That sounds like force to me. And here's the thing. If someone chooses to change their own work, it can be of their own free will. Well according to half of the people in this thread, tailoring your game to your audience is self censorship. I agree, but I also think there's nothing wrong with that, and people seem to disagree with me. Well in order for this to be that, you need something concrete that this was done out of fear. And considering Nintendo described this as business as usual and there was no real organized outcry against the skinshipping, I don't really see how this is the case.

Responding to feedback? Once again, I fail to see how that is so terrible. Because no matter """""""how""""""" """"""many"""""" """"""quotations"""""""" you put up, you can't make the feedback they chose to respond to invalid. What point is that? That listening to feedback and trying to make it that your game can be enjoyed by everyone is a bad thing? Because I fail to see how they were forced into this. Did I say that? Where did I say that? You know what I think? That artists should be allowed to do what they want. And in these situations, artists are doing what they want. People can disagree with them if they want to, and aritsts can change their mind. Don't put words in my mouth. Oh don't talk about what would happen if I had things "my way", the only thing you have to offer there is a strawman argument. I don't know how we can agree on something when you aren't responding to the arguments I actually made and are instead making some up. Which is, again a strawman argument.

The first one did. Which was an xbox exclusive, a console that did horribly in the east. Once it stopped being exclusive, sales favored the east. If that's the only thing keeping sales greater in the west then that doesn't speak very highly of the game.

Yeah, but you clearly can reply in length, as shown here. Not really. You think censorship is always bad and I think it's ok when the artist wants to do it. Bit of ways to go before we hit polar opposite. "Denied" stop putting words in my mouth. I never said that anywhere. Do I need to keep a list of all the arguments you've attributed to me that I never bloody said? "Creator can't express themselves as they wish," how many times do I have to say that artists change their work all the time and its part of the process? Or are you just ignoring me now?

Well, there we are. That's our arguments. And that's fine. It actually kind of fits with a theory I've had. Much like Western women 'tailor' their works to fit the sexually repressive countries in the Middle East ('cause they listen to that feedback you love so much), Japan, based on that good old feedback treats us similarly! Yay for feedback. Kill me.

 

[Erttheking]

Well, there we are. That's our arguments. And that's fine. It actually kind of fits with a theory I've had. Much like Western women 'tailor' their works to fit the sexually repressive countries in the Middle East ('cause they listen to that feedback you love so much), Japan, based on that good old feedback treats us similarly! Yay for feedback. Kill me.

...We're talking about video games. Not the sexual culture of the Middle East. Feedback tends to work pretty well in an industry that relies on selling millions of copies of its product. Let's keep things in perspective, shall we? *Sigh* You're not really listening to my arguments are you? You're arguing past me.

 

[Something Amyss]

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.

It's also worth noting that there was a petition to get the game ported. It failed to get the 5K signatures that was its goal. By about 20%. The new one's doing better--with the "SJW's are censoring me!" routine, the second petition's just over 5K signatures, with a goal of 7,500.

And I'm not even sure how to react to the notion that 4,000 people are going to be worth the time or money to bring the game over. But then, maybe the SJWs also censored the petition or something.

 

[SquallTheBlade]

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?

Why not? They CAN stop being games for just children if you ask me. Just look what happened to Digimon

Spoiler

Can't wait untill I get my hands on the Cyber Sleuth

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

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?

Why not? They CAN stop being games for just children if you ask me. Just look what happened to Digimon

Spoiler

Can't wait untill I get my hands on the Cyber Sleuth

So you do want a dark age, you're just not saying it directly. Ok. Thanks for the clarification.

EDIT: I did it guys, I'm finally an SJW. Now, can somebody tell me when and where the meetings for the shadow government are?

 

[Chriss_m]

Well, there we are. That's our arguments. And that's fine. It actually kind of fits with a theory I've had. Much like Western women 'tailor' their works to fit the sexually repressive countries in the Middle East ('cause they listen to that feedback you love so much), Japan, based on that good old feedback treats us similarly! Yay for feedback. Kill me.

...We're talking about video games. Not the sexual culture of the Middle East. Feedback tends to work pretty well in an industry that relies on selling millions of copies of its product. Let's keep things in perspective, shall we? *Sigh* You're not really listening to my arguments are you? You're arguing past me.

No, we're talking about art and censorship. Why is Lady Gaga's album any more worthy than Fire Emblem? Why do you support the censorship of one but presumably oppose of it of the other? Or perhaps you agree. Either way, I'm going to find your response heinous, so it really doesn't matter. Like I said, we differ on philosophy here. And never will we agree.

 

[SquallTheBlade]

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?

Why not? They CAN stop being games for just children if you ask me. Just look what happened to Digimon

Spoiler

Can't wait untill I get my hands on the Cyber Sleuth

So you do want a dark age, you're just not saying it directly. Ok. Thanks for the clarification.

Sexy girls now means that games are in a dark age? If that's the case, I welcome this dark age with open arms. Now I just need to find a way to get more petting mini-games aswell.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

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?

Why not? They CAN stop being games for just children if you ask me. Just look what happened to Digimon

Spoiler

Can't wait untill I get my hands on the Cyber Sleuth

So you do want a dark age, you're just not saying it directly. Ok. Thanks for the clarification.

Sexy girls now means that games are in a dark age? If that's the case, I welcome this dark age with open arms. Now I just need to find a way to get more petting mini-games aswell.

No, turning children's properties into properties exclusively for adults because you liked them when you were a kid starts a dark age. You do realize that I'm talking about the dark age of comics right? Thus the Rob Liefield and Miller references.

 

[Erttheking]

Well, there we are. That's our arguments. And that's fine. It actually kind of fits with a theory I've had. Much like Western women 'tailor' their works to fit the sexually repressive countries in the Middle East ('cause they listen to that feedback you love so much), Japan, based on that good old feedback treats us similarly! Yay for feedback. Kill me.

...We're talking about video games. Not the sexual culture of the Middle East. Feedback tends to work pretty well in an industry that relies on selling millions of copies of its product. Let's keep things in perspective, shall we? *Sigh* You're not really listening to my arguments are you? You're arguing past me.

No, we're talking about art and censorship. Why is Lady Gaga's album any more worthy than Fire Emblem? Why do you support the censorship of one but presumably oppose of it of the other? Or perhaps you agree. Either way, I'm going to find your response heinous, so it really doesn't matter. Like I said, we differ on philosophy here. And never will we agree.

How are the two related in anyway? Uh, I don't buy into a black or white, all or nothing morality. The two are not comparable. In anyway. I don't see any comparison between a gaming company choosing to change their game (of their own free will by the way, you've yet to present any proof that fear or force played a role) and Lady Gaga being forced to censor herself because of the law in the Middle East. It's like saying playfully pinched and getting punched in the groin are comparable. And if you want to keep arguing with me, go back to the last large post I made and reply to my arguments in detail. Well if we're not going to agree, can you at least properly debate with me? Address my arguments instead of just ignoring them.

 

[Chriss_m]

Well, there we are. That's our arguments. And that's fine. It actually kind of fits with a theory I've had. Much like Western women 'tailor' their works to fit the sexually repressive countries in the Middle East ('cause they listen to that feedback you love so much), Japan, based on that good old feedback treats us similarly! Yay for feedback. Kill me.

...We're talking about video games. Not the sexual culture of the Middle East. Feedback tends to work pretty well in an industry that relies on selling millions of copies of its product. Let's keep things in perspective, shall we? *Sigh* You're not really listening to my arguments are you? You're arguing past me.

No, we're talking about art and censorship. Why is Lady Gaga's album any more worthy than Fire Emblem? Why do you support the censorship of one but presumably oppose of it of the other? Or perhaps you agree. Either way, I'm going to find your response heinous, so it really doesn't matter. Like I said, we differ on philosophy here. And never will we agree.

How are the two related in anyway? Uh, I don't buy into a black or white, all or nothing morality. The two are not comparable. In anyway. I don't see any comparison between a gaming company choosing to change their game (of their own free will by the way, you've yet to present any proof that fear or force played a role) and Lady Gaga being forced to censor herself because of the law in the Middle East. It's like saying playfully pinched and getting punched in the groin are comparable. And if you want to keep arguing with me, go back to the last large post I made and reply to my arguments in detail. Well if we're not going to agree, can you at least properly debate with me? Address my arguments instead of just ignoring them.

How are two examples of content being changed due to cultural differences related in any way? Uh. I'm not sure how I can make that any clearer for you.

Here's the thing. Lady Gaga *wasn't* forced to censor it. She chose to. In order to release it in those countries - not ALL of which had in place legal demands anyway. So I don't know what you're talking about.

Okay, other than that little matter of fact, we really are done. There really is nothing else to say. You simply refuse to acknowledge how grim your perspective is. You can have the real last word this time.

 

[Erttheking]

Well, there we are. That's our arguments. And that's fine. It actually kind of fits with a theory I've had. Much like Western women 'tailor' their works to fit the sexually repressive countries in the Middle East ('cause they listen to that feedback you love so much), Japan, based on that good old feedback treats us similarly! Yay for feedback. Kill me.

...We're talking about video games. Not the sexual culture of the Middle East. Feedback tends to work pretty well in an industry that relies on selling millions of copies of its product. Let's keep things in perspective, shall we? *Sigh* You're not really listening to my arguments are you? You're arguing past me.

No, we're talking about art and censorship. Why is Lady Gaga's album any more worthy than Fire Emblem? Why do you support the censorship of one but presumably oppose of it of the other? Or perhaps you agree. Either way, I'm going to find your response heinous, so it really doesn't matter. Like I said, we differ on philosophy here. And never will we agree.

How are the two related in anyway? Uh, I don't buy into a black or white, all or nothing morality. The two are not comparable. In anyway. I don't see any comparison between a gaming company choosing to change their game (of their own free will by the way, you've yet to present any proof that fear or force played a role) and Lady Gaga being forced to censor herself because of the law in the Middle East. It's like saying playfully pinched and getting punched in the groin are comparable. And if you want to keep arguing with me, go back to the last large post I made and reply to my arguments in detail. Well if we're not going to agree, can you at least properly debate with me? Address my arguments instead of just ignoring them.

How are two examples of content being changed due to cultural differences related in any way? Uh. I'm not sure how I can make that any clearer for you.

Here's the thing. Lady Gaga *wasn't* forced to censor it. She chose to. In order to release it in those countries - not ALL of which had in place legal demands anyway. So I don't know what you're talking about.

Okay, other than that little matter of fact, we really are done. There really is nothing else to say. You simply refuse to acknowledge how grim your perspective is. You can have the real last word this time.

Sorry, you need a little more to compare them than "Content changed due to cultural differences." I don't compare people making independent decisions without any force to being being forced to comply because of laws. I don't know how I can make that any clearer for YOU.

There's the catch though. If she wanted to release it to those countries, she had to change it. HAD. Didn't have a choice in the matter. If Nintendo wanted to include the skinshipping, there wasn't any law stopping them. They just decided to change it on their own. That's what I'm talking about

Don't talk about how I refuse to acknowledge anything about my perspective when I've still got a post filled with arguments you haven't addressed. We're done? You said that three posts ago.

 

[RandV80]

Man people talking about things being for adults, but right or wrong in Japan this sort of thing is targeted at 12-18 year old's. It just another thing filed under the 'Japan is weird' category.

 

[wulf3n]

I remember recently when Nintendo decided to patch out same-sex marriage in Tomadachi life [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.849406-Nintendo-Says-No-To-Same-Sex-Relationships-For-Tomodachi-Miis?page=1]

It's fascinating to compare peoples reactions in each thread. It gives a really good insight into what people really care about.

 

[Kaimax]

F*** Kotaku
Now we got a response directly from Nintendo that says, they have "not announced" a removal. So, the petting minigame is still in Schrodinger's territory.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrucEdthLOg

Spoiler

Edit
Interesting tweet whether or not it was removed, seen by the file size of the game
https://twitter.com/SDC_Batz/status/692542462418616320

ALSO forgot to mention this
-If petting is removed, people who play Nohr (Conquest) is kinda fucked. As the petting game is essential for Support Building without Grinding battles, and Conquest is the one game with the classic Style of FE which is no Grinding.

 

[MatthewTheDark]

F*** Kotaku
Now we got a response directly from Nintendo that says, they have "not announced" a removal. So, the petting minigame is still in Schrodinger's territory.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrucEdthLOg

Spoiler

Edit
Interesting tweet whether or not it was removed, seen by the file size of the game
https://twitter.com/SDC_Batz/status/692542462418616320

ALSO forgot to mention this
-If petting is removed, people who play Nohr (Conquest) is kinda fucked. As the petting game is essential for Support Building without Grinding battles, and Conquest is the one game with the classic Style of FE which is no Grinding.

Guess this is a lesson in never trusting Kotaku. Now only February will tell the fate of Fates.

 

[EternallyBored]

F*** Kotaku
Now we got a response directly from Nintendo that says, they have "not announced" a removal. So, the petting minigame is still in Schrodinger's territory.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrucEdthLOg

Spoiler

Edit
Interesting tweet whether or not it was removed, seen by the file size of the game
https://twitter.com/SDC_Batz/status/692542462418616320

ALSO forgot to mention this
-If petting is removed, people who play Nohr (Conquest) is kinda fucked. As the petting game is essential for Support Building without Grinding battles, and Conquest is the one game with the classic Style of FE which is no Grinding.

Not essential, as the mini game just builds support with the main character, the npcs getting support ranks with each other is still entirely doable, the petting minigame just makes it so you don't have to spend the entire Nohr path meticulously planning out what supports to build with the protagonist. Basically it makes getting multiple high support characters on the protagonist easier which frees up those npcs to build s ranks with each other to get their child character later in the games. It's still doable and playable, it's just a much bigger pain in the ass that involves planning out which characters you want to pair up without wasting missions building support links with characters that aren't gonna give you extra troops down the line. Which can be a handicap as everyone I know says the Nohr path is significantly harder than Hoshidos, tragically they also say the Conquest storyline is not nearly as good as usual fire emblem games, and not even as good as the Hoshido storyline.

So yeah, the game would still be beatable and getting S ranks possible without the petting minigame, but it would involve planning who you're going to build relationships with basically from the start of the campaign, which would involve spoiling yourself on what characters join you in which mission ahead of time. If the rumor does turn out to be true for whatever reason, I do hope they rebalance it to some extent, because while I still think the whole minigame is dumb, pointless, and the worst sort of otaku pandering infecting anime, they did balance at least part of the game around being able to do it, and I would hate to miss out on characters entirely because I wasn't playing Cupid from the first mission.

 

[wulf3n]

That listening to feedback and trying to make it that your game can be enjoyed by everyone is a bad thing?

Depends on what side of the fence you're on. Ultimately no change that can be made will allow the game to be enjoyed by everyone. Any change made will be seen as brilliant by some, and the most offensive thing since sliced bread by others.