-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Nintendo doesn't plan on censoring video games, will only rely on 3rd-party rating boards
- Thread starter Deleted member 10737
- Start date
- Status
Do like people not understand that platform holders can make demands on what they allow on their platform? Free speech isn't some checkmate that allows you to just spew unregulated garbage on whatever platform you want. Sony has every right to ask for things to be changed, just like Nintendo seems to be fine with not doing that. Be smarter people
(Plus it feels like an uncomfortable amount of "I don't like sexualized children buttttttttt" on this thread and like, maybe thats not an argument winning position haha)
(Plus it feels like an uncomfortable amount of "I don't like sexualized children buttttttttt" on this thread and like, maybe thats not an argument winning position haha)
Nintendo is probably aware of the negative bias they had thanks to the kiddy image they got and consequentialy was used by it's competitors and detractors in order to downplay them. Even today there's such (false) conception about Nintendo and even some third-parties seems to endorse it, given their reluctance to support it's consoles.
OP
OP
they absolutely have the legal right to do it, i don't think anyone here is claiming what they're doing is illegal. it's mostly about whether people think they should do it or not, regardless of if they can or can't do it (they clearly can, since they're already doing it).
I'm pretty sure no one here wants loli shit or bouncing Anime titties and have even said as such. People are saying it's good because they don't want any potential unnecessary censorship in 3rd party titles on the system and feel that it should be handled by the ESRB, seeing as none of Sony's censorship is really all that helpful as the games are still there and their efforts to cover stuff up is laughable. What should be done is the Big 3 working with or someone from the ESRB perhaps revising the rating system or taking stronger action against stuff like that
Last edited:
Right approach by Nintendo. The ratings boards are there to handle this and change should be through them. Platform holders doing this leads to unneeded issues for Devs where the rules are just arbitrary. Like we know this isn't just about representation of minors for Sony or they'd just stated that as their policy. Instead Sony keeps it super secret and they still allow the games with sexualized minors on their system with some minimal poor censorship.
They did! For their 14 year old >___>
(terrible outfit even regardless)
But then they stopped, I guess. Then this happened
Honestly games operate in a weird space...
I'm sure the minute that the ESRB or other ratings boards makes a move towards tightening up restrictions on shit like sexualized children, i'm sure everyone is just going to to go "well now that the acceptable channels of change have picked this up, we are totally now fine with it being removed." Well i mean, its either that or people are just going to do the same slippery slope and "This isn't the right way to go about it" fits. But i'm totally sure the first option, Gamers typically take things well.
I laughed way too hard when this happened in my game, it's so bizarre.
Honestly games operate in a weird space...
Yes, the point of this thread is that Nintendo is not forcing third parties to censor their own games, unlike Sony. Nintendo has stopped censoring their own games lately though, as well. None of their Switch games are censored for the localizations unlike on Wii U/3DS.
OP
OP
i fully agree. i feel like the big 3 combined have enough power over the rating boards to be able to encourage them to use more strict policies and deny rating to these games.
I agree. It doesn't solve anything. The light beams and mists aren't fixing that problem, they are finding the least invasive way of normalizing it. At the end of the day, the ratings agencies need to expand and do something about this shit. Adding light beams isn't enough, not doing anything about it at all isn't enough either. And its because the problem isn't with the platform holders, its with the ratings agencies.
But everyones trying to make the platform holders the 'solution'. Its not going to work. Fix the actual problem instead of passing the buck and this gets addressed. Otherwise the extremely suggestive, "totally not fooling anybody" lense flares covering dicks are the best you will get. And that shit ain't good enough, no matter how much you want to kiss your favs asses for "at least doing something". And merely stepping back and saying "Not my problem" isn't fucking good enough either, no matter how much you try and crown your favs for "Minding their own business". Crazy that even a topic like this gets infested by fucking fanboyism. We should all at least be able to agree on something like this but... of course not.
Exactly. Until this happens, and the lazy ass ratings boards get off their asses and do their jobs, noone gets praise from me. They are all dropping the ball.
They have been trying to control the type of software that is to be released on their platform forever and everyone hated them for it: developers, players, everyone kept hating them for that.
they are already winning a lot of developers back, they are not going to damage that now.
they are already winning a lot of developers back, they are not going to damage that now.
That's cause none of their games of late require censoring. First game that could possibly have it that's coming out is probably Fire Emblem: The Three Houses. IIRC Tokyo Mirage Sessions was censored too.
Ehh, I wouldn't say hurt them for since that's marketing that Nintendo has kept with saying for decades that their focus was family entertainment.
Switch is the first time they blatantly marketed a console to adults and even that had more to do with the initial marketing announcements (a bunch of hipsters bringing their cool system on the go to rooftop parties) then reality. It's still impossible to add strangers as 'friends', their crack down on pro LGBTQ maps in Smash, etc.
Probably the GameCube was the last time truly went after an adult audience with Eternal Darkness as far as putting its development foot where its mouth is as far as catering to adults.
Also, that example on smartphones is pure whataboutism. Obviously in 2019 adult content is everywhere, that doesn't escape the fact that Nintendo has actively courted their kid friendly image and while I would normally applaud them opening up their horizons, they clearly want their cake (labo like products) and eat it too(give a press release about non-censoring, continues to over-sensor user made shit).
I too used to get annoyed at Nintendo focusing on family friendly content, and maybe Reggie (RIP) wore me down over the years but I now see a place for having a system where when you pop online someone's calling you racial slurs for not playing to an arbitrary 'meta', and free of things like 'no russian'. Even if inconsistent, even if its borderline problematic, considering the cesspool gaming can be I can't be mad at a company trying to keep it clean *shrug*.
And I say this as someone who generally plays hardcore games and mostly online
With the coming changes nowadays, I'd say we might have a chance of something like that. There hasn't been any major changes to these sort of policies in like 2 decades or so, right, so it'd be long overdue
What 3rd party game did they censor last gen?
Yeah, we haven't exactly had any adequate solutions for this yet
Joke post? What trash? You mean like this,
Life of Black Tiger
Sony has been censoring good games too.
Man, how tables have turned.
I didn't think of it as censorship, more like a cultural adaptation. I played it on japanese audio with subtitles so everytime they said "神" and the traslation stated it as "Architect" I just assumed it had something to do with a better comprehension of the story for the western audience.
OP
OP
you mean one single stage getting taken down, probably by mistake. crack down? please.
this is completely baseless
I am glad that Sony are doing something rather than passively accepting what rating boards deem okay; they are definitely ahead of the curve. I wish they would go even further and just outright ban these trash games from their platform but as a first step this is a good one.
It's extremely disappointing that Nintendo have regressed so far as to even have the millennia old lolis in their own internally developed games.
It's extremely disappointing that Nintendo have regressed so far as to even have the millennia old lolis in their own internally developed games.
That something they're doing isn't amounting to much. Not exactly what I'd call ahead of the curve
It's not mutually exclusive tbh. Sony isn't exactly great on this, but they're ahead of the curve because the others are downright awful.
TMS #FE was a Wii U game, though. If Xenoblade 2 released on the Wii U I'm sure Pyra and some of the other Rare Blades would've been changed in the western versions.
What Sony is doing is slightly less awful and has even lead to weird censorship in games like DMC V so it's far from being ahead of the curve. At best, it's basically nothing and, at worst, it just leads to concerns of further censorship down the road. Really, if any of the Big 3 wanna take a stance against this, why not work it out with the ratings board to actually get something done? They're own solutions aren't gonna amount to much
I know what you're getting at but the OG 1000 year old dragon is from a Nintendo game from 1990.
I mean... at the same time "No Russian" was a thing, they were doing some limited advertising for a Manhunt port on the Wii. Which was so much worse.
The family friendly aspect of Nintendo's marketing kind of died when Iwata took over. They stopped censoring games pretty much immediately and bought exclusive rights to Resident Evil/published M rated games like Twin Snakes and Eternal Darkness for the first time. They were allowing stuff like BMX XXX to rock. They wouldn't even publish Conker's Bad Fur Day a year or two before that. Wii and Wii U were branded as four quadrant systems, to casuals and adults; seniors and non-gamers or gamers who would play bejeweled and facebook type games, but their reputation as a kids game marker definitely hurt them against Sega and Playstation during the SNES, N64 and GameCube years where the ultimate goal would have been a schism like Switch: kid-friendly software, but not pidgeonholed by publishers and consumers.
Honestly there is nothing wrong with a little T&A, both male and females like sex appeal, and Sony's "regulations" were not limited to "underaged lolis" who are 1000s of years old. They were legit forcing censoring on legit adults, and forcing devs to remove features that were deeply ingrain in a game which caused them to break when removed. It's fine to not like lolis, it's fine to not like gore, it's fine for a platform holder to choose what it wants, and it's fine for consumers to choose what they buy. The reality is that once the "war on lolis" is over, Sony will just come after something else until nothing that upsets people will be in any game on their platforms.
Of course the platform holder gets to decide
If I own a grocery store and I don't want your mouldy cauliflowers I can tell you buck up or go sell at another store
Well that's not what's happening. Its more like if you cover up the mouldy cauliflower to make them look more appealing and still sell them
OP
OP
I support this decision not because I'm against banning sexualised underaged characters but because Sony has proven themselves incapable of banning only that stuff.
In the UK Omega Labyrinth was refused classification and banned rightfully so.
If Sony was just going after that it would be fine but why is a girl with an adult body in a bikini getting censored? I know some people see all anime styled women as children but that's not reflective of artist intention always.
This is why it should be up to the government and rating boards to refuse classification and ban problematic content.
In the UK Omega Labyrinth was refused classification and banned rightfully so.
If Sony was just going after that it would be fine but why is a girl with an adult body in a bikini getting censored? I know some people see all anime styled women as children but that's not reflective of artist intention always.
This is why it should be up to the government and rating boards to refuse classification and ban problematic content.
Sony's policy is toothless anyway since it's largely undefined, unfairly enforced and the really objectionable content (sexualization of minors) makes it through anyway plus purity rays. Their intent might be right on some level but the actual execution is an arbitrary mess with eneffectual results (other than causing 3rd party headaches). Really it's nothing more than lipservice.
I generally support Nintendo and Microsoft's position of no content control and leaving that to objective external industry bodies to Apple and Sony's position of case by case content approval. At the same time though there are clear issues with industry self regulation that need to be addressed, not only regarding areas of inappropriate sexualization but also things like predatory monetization/gambling mechanics (and no mods, this isn't equating or dismissing anything). A larger systemic industry problem that one's really taking on.
I generally support Nintendo and Microsoft's position of no content control and leaving that to objective external industry bodies to Apple and Sony's position of case by case content approval. At the same time though there are clear issues with industry self regulation that need to be addressed, not only regarding areas of inappropriate sexualization but also things like predatory monetization/gambling mechanics (and no mods, this isn't equating or dismissing anything). A larger systemic industry problem that one's really taking on.
User Banned (1 month): Defending depictions of sexualization of minors.
I personally don't care about those games but if there is an audience for it, good for them, they can enjoy that stuff freely. Why you have to be that annoying guy who judge for others what's good and what's bad.
What if you don't like porn and you start to rage about the existence of such contents on the internet? it's the same principle.
Sony's not pointing anything out by telling the devs to add more light beams or mist, instead they're having their cake and eating it too by doing the littlest amount possible. What we're likely to see going forward is just more of the same but now devs are prepared to add more light beams and mist. Sony is doing absolutely nothing. It's toothless, it's half-assed, and all over the place and it shows because some games will get this sort of change but others won't.
If Sony truly cared about the subject they would just outright not allow them on their platform. They would also be doing more with the rating boards to get changes. This would be an actual stance from the company and fighting for better regulation so there's less pedo material. But they are not because they are toothless.
If Sony truly cared about the subject they would just outright not allow them on their platform. They would also be doing more with the rating boards to get changes. This would be an actual stance from the company and fighting for better regulation so there's less pedo material. But they are not because they are toothless.
So you seem to agree there is a problem you just prefer platform holders to sit on their hands and hide behind rating boards.
OP
OP
in short: yes. i don't think platform holders should act on their own and put up their own rules, i think they should work to change the rules that apply across the board.
At the risk of overly simplifying the problem, I don't think there's really a lot for the ratings boards to do when so much of the content that's being targeted is more suggestive than it is explicit. Something like Omega Labyrinth Z crossed the line and was justified in its refusal for classification, but as far as I can tell, nothing else since has dared to come close to that kind of interactivity that could be put under that intense a lens.
So the answer for people who don't want developers not to add pedo bait content is to just not buy them?
There are plenty of people who believe this shit is fine because "they are not real". Does that mean it should be okay to make those games?
Okay, just seems weird to me to cheer for status quo when there is a problem that will never get dealt with.
- Status