Monster Monpiece Censored for Sexual Imagery of Girl Monsters

[CloudAtlas]

Overall I find all this defending of this sexualization of underaged girls a bit disturbing, but I can't say that I'm surprised.

Yes because fake children need to be protected from fake molesters in a fake world.....

If I have to defend myself for being uncomfortable with the sexualization of underage girls, or more specifically: with a gameplay mechanic that is pretty much 'fiddling teenage girls', then maybe this isn't the right place for me.

 

[CloudAtlas]

the act of murder takes place in video games. Children should not have access to a game where they can commit murder, therefore, any video game with an instance of murder must be censored before it can be released in the US.

Bet you can see why it's both backwards and dumb, now.

I'm pretty sure games where you can murder humans (in a somewhat realistic fashion) are at least rated Teen in the US well. So children don't have access to them, and I can't say that I'm opposing that.

 

[Roxas1359]

I'm pretty sure games where you can murder humans (in a somewhat realistic fashion) are at least rated Teen in the US well. So children don't have access to them, and I can't say that I'm opposing that.

Children do have access to them though. You are not carded or anything when it comes to rated T games and stores can sell T rated games to 8 year olds if they wanted to without any needed permission from parents. It's only rated M games that require someone with an ID who is 17 or older.

 

[Flippincrazy]

Knew this story would attract this degree of attention... Eh.

As I see it, this is merely a small conflict of ideology between two nations with fundamentally different contexts and, to a lesser extent, global ideologies. From what I understand, the developers changed this so as to widen their potential international market by removing material that may be deemed unacceptable by a portion of their potential market, thereby boosting their profits. Simple.

Whilst I'm sure that using this news piece as figurehead for heated 'discussions' about censorship and the ethicacy of 'lolicon' is no doubt fun, it's not really necessary. At least keep it civil.

 

[4ged]

anyone who is arguing over the Ao vs M rating and using the argument of it should not be accessible to kids is missing the point of the ESRB rating system to begin with, both ratings are for adult content in the USA and are not for kids, M rated games are for 17+ and Ao are for 18+ so kids are not in the equation at all, so stop. also the us federal court has ruled that its not illegal because there is no victim, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_pornography_laws_in_the_United_States, so there is no breach of law here. as to the censorship of these images in there game, its about money and marketing just like movies that go for the pg13 rating instead of R so they can get more people in them, (man of steal/star trek) and other movies that put in full exposed breasts and almost soft-cor porn in the directors cut of movies to draw in the taboo crowd its marketing, but you wouldn't buy this game for a 12 yo kid as much as you would take him/her to see Saw or Hostel, if you did even in prudish USA with all its deplorable violence, you would be a bad parent. one of the downfalls of the freedom of media in my country is that you can buy those games and movies for your kids but you will fuck them up and that's what CPS (child protective services) is for. this game is clearly marketed to adults with a loli fetish so its not like its going to be at Walmart, chances are game-stop will have one copy, pre-ordered, for a very sad and lonely basement dweller.

 

[BX3]

Not much of a point selling this garbage if you don't include the reason people would buy it. Dumbasses!

It's not like people buy it for the shitty gameplay.

Which is a shame, if only they made games that where both good games and porn at the same time.

They do, but people tend to get hung up on the sex stuff a lot to the point that whether it's a good game or not tends to get lost in the fold. See fighting games. Anyway....

-------------------------------------------------------------

I find it hilarious that this game is getting localized in the first place. It hits just about every niche of "creepy japanese bullshit" that people in the west detest. Plus, we're still in the middle an ever-growing debate on sexism in the media.

*shrugs*, say what you want about the US being prudish, but despite the censorship, that this game is being brought over here in the first place means they acknowledge there's a market for it. I'd say times are-a changing. Whether it's for the best or the worst depends on the person, though.

 

[EyeReaper]

you know what I just realized? There already was a game that had touching up and rubbing monsters to make them better in battle. Except, instead of stripping them, they start out completely naked!

It was pretty popular too. It was called Pokemon X/Y.

(yes, that was a joke.)

 

[MrFalconfly]

Strawmen and slippery slopes.

Oh what the hell. I thought Nephilimfree had turned into obscurity.

In any case I can only say loli as based on the Japanese age of consent is justifiably and categorically wrong.

Age of consent in Japan is 13. Age at which the body is actually developed enough for sexual intercourse would be 14.
Characters drawn to look 12 might be fake but there's still something obviously wrong with the guys liking them (and no that isn't based on opinion but rather biology).

And don't give me any slippery slopes about gays. The human species is obviously still here so clearly there's an advantage for a group to have a contingent of gays.

 

[[REDACTED]]

Overall I find all this defending of this sexualization of underaged girls a bit disturbing, but I can't say that I'm surprised.

Yes because fake children need to be protected from fake molesters in a fake world.....

If I have to defend myself for being uncomfortable with the sexualization of underage girls, or more specifically: with a gameplay mechanic that is pretty much 'fiddling teenage girls', then maybe this isn't the right place for me.

People aren't expecting you to defend yourself for that. I'm willing to bet that a lot of the people here defending this game feel the same way. But that's not what's being debated here. People are arguing about whether games or drawings can be classified as child pornography, which is a fairly complex moral question. What you did was come in to this thread and imply that everyone who disagrees with you is a pedophile. That is insulting and immature on a truly jaw-dropping level. I know that you're capable of making some of the most well-reasoned arguments I've seen on this site, and this is beneath you.

As for my opinion on the whole thing, it's basically a great big "Ehhhh...?" While I find games like this highly distasteful, and hugely disrespectful of child rape victims to boot, I generally draw the moral line at the point when an actual person was harmed in its production. That still leaves a lot of deeply unpleasant gray area, though. Is an erotic story based on real-life acts of child molestation also child pornography? One would hope so, but I'm a bit unclear on the laws surrounding that in the US.

And what of the children who consent or don't know any other life? It is still child porn, but without the victim status because the child knows no better life or, again, consents. Do you think that should not be censored? I think it should. Like I said, the censor is in place for a reason.

Did you just say what I think you said? A child who consents to sex is an oxymoron. You can't consent to something you only half-understand and that you're being pressured into doing by someone in a position of power over you. And the bit about "knowing no better way of life?" So someone who is born into slavery isn't a victim, then? I think I'm too stunned to be properly angry right now.

 

[Sarge034]

]Did you just say what I think you said? A child who consents to sex is an oxymoron. You can't consent to something you only half-understand and that you're being pressured into doing by someone in a position of power over you. And the bit about "knowing no better way of life?" So someone who is born into slavery isn't a victim, then? I think I'm too stunned to be properly angry right now.

Children who consent? Children aren't fit to consent. How alarming that you didn't know. How alarming that you think the consent of a child suspends the status of victim.

I know full well what I said. So 13+ year old girls turn to prostitution in Malaysia to help buy food. Did they not consent? Would their life be better if they didn't have the money? I'm thinking globally, not just in the developed world. Are they a victim? Of circumstance absolutely, but they know what they are doing and why they are doing it. So if someone decides that they want to watch Malaysian child porn because the child has a better standard of living because of it would you oppose them watching it after you said that only you have the right to decide what you see and only if that doesn't hurt anyone? My point is that there is a standard. We can not allow individuals to see anything they deem fit because people will deem inappropriate content fit to watch. Child porn is in this category and it must be applied as evenly as possible. These girls looked under age and the game has you removing their clothes. So logically a bunch of people come to the conclusion that it is depicting a form of child porn.

-
How are those two statements incompatible? I do think censorship is too strong a response. And I also wouldn't buy it from western distributors if I had been interested in the first place.

Simply put? Because I'm calling BS on the first statement.

-
I didn't think I had to be painstakingly specific, but in cases where adjustments are made to the original vision of X, Y or Z and those adjustments are known to the public, I will avoid the article of media in question or circumvent the censorship by some means. Example: Manhunt 2 in the UK. Vanguard Princess in the west.

What if the "adjustment" makes the game better? Or when the original is illegal in your country due to having the censured material?

Or, to be painstakingly specific, if you consume ANY media? It is all censured in some way. Be it langue, "spin", available information, graphic content, ect.

-
Again, no. Children and rape victims are victims whose rights are being curbed by others. Drawings are neither and have no rights. The fact that I had to explain that to you at all is kind of funny...

As I stated before, not all people have first world rights and luxuries. I think you said it best, "The fact that I had to explain that to you at all is kind of funny..."

 

[ryan_cs]

I know full well what I said. So 13+ year old girls turn to prostitution in Malaysia to help buy food. Did they not consent? Would their life be better if they didn't have the money? I'm thinking globally, not just in the developed world. Are they a victim? Of circumstance absolutely, but they know what they are doing and why they are doing it. So if someone decides that they want to watch Malaysian child porn because the child has a better standard of living because of it would you oppose them watching it after you said that only you have the right to decide what you see and only if that doesn't hurt anyone? My point is that there is a standard. We can not allow individuals to see anything they deem fit because people will deem inappropriate content fit to watch. Child porn is in this category and it must be applied as evenly as possible. These girls looked under age and the game has you removing their clothes. So logically a bunch of people come to the conclusion that it is depicting a form of child porn.

However it is not concent if someone is forced into it, regardless of circumstance. I am also very sure that prostitution of any kind is illegal over there, voluntary, involuntary, adult, or otherwise, it depresses and angers me that forced prostitution still happens anyway.

Back on topic, please let this be only about the US, Europe, and Japan as it is only about those three countries in the article. I agree with you, porn with children should not be allowed, and the developers are probably making a smart move doing this, but I don't think this counts as child porn as no actual children are involved.

 

[TristanBelmont]

Does it amaze anyone else that a card game was rated M?

 

[Arqus_Zed]

I wish I could care, but the only thing I can think of is:

"Oh, Idea Factory, those losers who don't just publish crap title after crap title, but actually DEVELOPED the culling of class known as Hyperdimension Neptunia."

Screw the game and screw the company, it's not worth getting into an actual discussion over.

 

[Therumancer]

I almost went "goodie a new Vita game" until I found out it's basically a work of soft porn that doesn't seem to have much behind it (but then again I'm not a big "card battler" fan), and what's more is being censored, which means I won't support it on principle even if it was really good, and have to hope that it's an epic failure for that reason. Things won't change when companies back down.... or refuse to bring over their products.

To this day I'm still sort of "proud" that Konami hasn't gotten a time from me at least after censoring "Silent Hill 2".

 

[Yuuki]

In Japan a lot of weird shit is acceptable as long as it's not harming anyone, it's law-abiding, and you don't openly talk about it (public decency is key). Hence the really weird shit when it comes to anime/fetishes/etc.

This may blow people's minds, but there are some Japanese married couples who are "fine" with cheating on each other and having affairs with others - as long as they don't TALK about it, it's seen as acceptable.
It's a radically different mindset + culture, more open/free in some ways yet restrictive in others.

If there are sexual drawings of child characters then legally that can be classified as child porn.So keep crying about censorship all you want and about how people should be allowed to see this(that's one huge slippery slope in of itself.)

Then lets hear a single all-encompassing definition of "child character" in terms of fictional/fantasy art.
In real life we have people's official age to determine whether they are children or not. In anime/cartoons we have...what exactly? As long a fictional characters' age isn't stated anywhere, they are whatever their creator claims them to be.

Don't get me wrong, I'm heavily turned-off by Loli/childish characters being depicted in sexy ways...but the boundaries regarding all this in anime are extremely blurry at best, so I can't really object to something those people enjoy. It's not harming anyone. At least, that's how the Japanese see it.

They do, but people tend to get hung up on the sex stuff a lot to the point that whether it's a good game or not tends to get lost in the fold. See fighting games. Anyway....

Name me 1 fighting game which has shitty gameplay, yet did well solely because of fanservice/pandering.
Common replies may include Dead Or Alive and Soul Calibur series, but those games both have huge dedicated communities formed around solely discussing gameplay/tactics/etc.

 

[Sarge034]

However it is not concent if someone is forced into it, regardless of circumstance. I am also very sure that prostitution of any kind is illegal over there, voluntary, involuntary, adult, or otherwise, it depresses and angers me that forced prostitution still happens anyway.

Back on topic, please let this be only about the US, Europe, and Japan as it is only about those three countries in the article. I agree with you, porn with children should not be allowed, and the developers are probably making a smart move doing this, but I don't think this counts as child porn as no actual children are involved.

Welcome to the conversation. Did you read the rest of the conversation or are you just "shocked and outraged" at my comments and feel the need to say something? It makes more sense if you do read them all.

What do you mean by "over there"? Malaysia? I hope you don't mean Malaysia. You do know where it is, right? Near; Singapore, Cambodia, Thailand, Vietnam, and Laos.

Spoiler: Prostitution is illegal over there...

Now, it comes down to the question, "What is child porn?" I would define it as, "Erotic images or videos depicting youth." I don't make the distinction between a real child and the overt, and completely intentional, depiction of a child's body. I see it both as child porn.

EDIT- and so does the law.

 

[Lunar Templar]

ok then ...

I was unaware there was a shortage of games people could use to get a 'happy ending' good to know some one's filling that gap, now if the designs where better I might actually care.

 

[go-10]

I played the Japanese version of this game a while back, of course I had someone translate/explain things to me as I played and after some time I got the hang of things I realized that other than the leveling up mechanic and art some cards have, this is a really good card battling game and it's all kinds of shitty that the media doesn't focus on it's card gameplay mechanics and instead is focused on rubbing and boobies

the card game is actually really good and strategic, it's the pandering that get annoying...

 

[Elf Defiler Korgan]

Lol, yet again people get weirded out by sexuality in a Japanese game. I really must point something out:

Comparing the body of a loli to an underage girl is a false comparison, no one looks like an anime character:

http://nerdreactor.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/hfl-02-12.png

http://majesticz.com/anime-girl-look-the-letter-hd.html

People do not look like anime characters. What is claimed to "look like children" is how manga artists depict legal age women as well. The shiny clean idealisation with impossibly flawless skin and missing certain human features (noses, impossible angle to the face) is indeed an art style. It isn't even close to how children or young adolescents look.

 

[cdstephens]

Strawmen and slippery slopes.

Oh what the hell. I thought Nephilimfree had turned into obscurity.

In any case I can only say loli as based on the Japanese age of consent is justifiably and categorically wrong.

Age of consent in Japan is 13. Age at which the body is actually developed enough for sexual intercourse would be 14.
Characters drawn to look 12 might be fake but there's still something obviously wrong with the guys liking them (and no that isn't based on opinion but rather biology).

And don't give me any slippery slopes about gays. The human species is obviously still here so clearly there's an advantage for a group to have a contingent of gays.

So it's wrong to think women of women that are very petite as attractive as well? Women that look like they could be in high school or younger but are actually in their 20s?