>>256859290 >>256859294 They removed the ages, and they never once submitted it in its original form to the ESRB, making them no better than NISA in that respect. It's minor, but it's still censorship and frankly I'm disappointed in XSeed for doing that.
>removing a set of digits in a profile is the same as removing an entire minigame, ~140 CG's, and a chunk of voice acting
I will say being 100% uncensored is cool, but I can see the reasoning behind removing the ages. Also, the gameplay and art were left completely untouched. And for the record, Dekamori is 100% untouched and uncensored due to the ages not being listed ingame.
>>256860058 >but I can see the reasoning behind removing the ages. Which was?
Don't say "they needed to do it for the ESRB" because just as with NISA they didn't even try, and don't say "they're underage so it's illegal" because one loli/minor vidya characters being sexualized is not illegal in the US, and there's not anything explicit anyway. They changed it to avoid backlash, just as NISA did, albeit what they censored was more major.
>And for the record, Dekamori is 100% untouched and uncensored due to the ages not being listed ingame. What about Shinovi Versus?
>>256860028 This is arguably even more minor than the Bravely Default censorship. Bravely Default CHANGED things, however minor, altering the artist's original intent. Senran Kagura may have removed things, but the company officially said "look online for their ages, they are the same as the japanese version".
>>256860364 The reason was because they also wanted to localize Versus if Burst sold. Versus got an M, and that's WITHOUT the ages, what do you think the rating would have been if they had left them in.
>>256860940 >>256860940 >The reason was because they also wanted to localize Versus if Burst sold. And you seriously think removing the ages contributed substantially to Burst's success? Nobody interested in Burst is going to care that the characters are technically underage. >what do you think the rating would have been if they had left them in. The same, because AO is reserved only for extreme violence and explicit sex.
I think that the point is that the butthurt from the general public would be even worse than it already is. Marvelous (XSeed) has an image to uphold with their rather popular games such as Harvest Moon, Rune Factory, and so on. The moment an article about how Marvelous produced a game that has "nude" (no clothes but conveniently blocked) minors would likely lead to a lot of damage to their name.
The real solution to this problem is to remove the moral rod from America's ass.
>>256861462 I see what you're saying but no one cares in the slightest about niche "weeaboo" games, and the generic public isn't butthurt or even aware of its existance. The most attention it will/did get would be from gaming "journalism" sites, and that would only serve to bolster sales because there's no such thing as bad publicity. For instance, look at Dragon's Crown. It sold what, a million copies, which is a lot more than any other Vanillaware game and they've been making games for almost seventeen years now.
>>256862930 Strike Witches on DVD got an uncensored release in the UK, where loli is outright illegal. It's one of those things that only gets shit if someone raises a stink and pretends to be offended.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from them. If you need IP information for a Poster - you need to contact them. This website shows only archived content.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content you can contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with that post and thread number and it will be removed as soon as possible.