Stop Crying Censorship Over Japanese Imports

When a company decides on its own to alter content for the West, is it censorship? No, it's not, and here's why.

[Darkwatchman]

Self-censorship out of fear of losing out on money or cultural differences or fear of controversy, etc...is censorship plain and cold.

The dictionary definition of censorship "the practice of officially examining books, movies, etc., and suppressing unacceptable parts." It has nothing to do with the government. Self-regulation and removing or altering content yourself to suit the norms of another region that might find original content offensive IS censorship because that other region might view the original content as unacceptable, hence the "suppressing unacceptable parts".

Sorry to break it to you, but it's still censorship.

[jaycptza]

You are right because companies should spend money and run teh risk of making less money all the name of anti-censorship. If the owner chooses to alter it's their choice

[Darkwatchman]

I'm not getting into the censorship debate. All im saying is that it's still censorship even if the government isn't involved.

[KwietStorm_BLM]

You missed his point, but they're not spending extra money by releasing the game in its original state. It's getting released and imported anyway. Their choice of cencorship or not, is not the issue.

[MoveTheGlow]

It's a real problem that we all seem to have different definitions of censorship that don't line up.

Writers like this say "This isn't censorship!" while it most definitely is - censorship does not need to be governmental. Writers on the complete other side of things equate this type of corporate censorship with government censorship, and even go so far as to blame some cabals, conspiracy theories, whatever.

If the writer just acknowledged that yes, this is censorship, there are different types, and this one isn't such a big deal, it would have at least made sense as a viewpoint and cooled the flames a little.

I get the angst. I've seen what 4Kids did to imported anime - changes that made the series notably worse. None of that has happened with these games. And it's not a slippery-slope thing either: either your localization team makes good decisions, crappy decisions, or no decision. If they're crappy decisions, they'll make less money, at least in the long run. As an adult, I'd rather they make no decision since I know I'll take this stuff in context, but I'm not the audience here. The writer is correct about one thing: this is capitalism.

[InTheZoneAC]

seems like so many people are entitled

And I agree, get over it

[Griever]

Entitlement means making unreasonable demands that one does not have any right to. Demanding the same product that the other customers get is not entitlement; it is a customer's right. Customers pay money so they have the right to demand, complain and protest if they want.

If I pay the money I reserve the right to demand how I want my product! Does your pizza parlor hands you whatever pizza they think is the right one for you or you ask for whatever you like? If I am paying money then I get to decide what I get!

Some people are such slave-minded; they always find resistance futile and prefer to lie down/bend over and take whatever is coming to them so that it does not hurts... much.

[InTheZoneAC]

if I'm denied a pizza I want I won't buy from them and will go elsewhere, but I won't cry about it. If people don't accept it then they have no choice but to change.

But no company should be told how to sell their product because you're willing to pay(not talking about ridiculous mark ups, talking about quality/contents).

It's as simple as not buying a product if you don't agree with it. If people had more common sense and followed this you would see a change.

/discussion

[Griever]

@InTheZoneAC

And what if that pizza is not available anywhere else? There is no other Bravely Default or Bravely Second and I cannot go anywhere else to get an uncensored one in English language.

Companies do have to obey customers. It is the basic principle of marketing/business. A business offers what consumers want to buy and not what they want them to buy. If they dont give you what you want and there is a substitute then you go over there but if there isnt then you protest and let them know your wants.

Speakig out does makes a difference you know. There are hundreds of examples in business world where companies had to listen to consumer outrage. Every heard about the "new coca cola" and "classic coca cola" debacle? If you do not speak then nothing will ever change. Who is Nintendo to decide if a certain content is suitable for me?? Why am I not allowed to have the same product that Japanese gamers got??

[rainslacker]

Entitlement is more that people demand more than they paid for, and then become belligerent when someone tells them no, you got what you paid for.

Complaining you don't like something isn't really entitlement, demanding for more than was promised, or for something to be changed because it doesn't meet one's expectations is if the product was delivered as promised. It's perfectly reasonable to expect to get what you paid for and what you were promised, it's not to demand more because you thought you were getting something else than what was promised though.

In your pizza analogy. If you got your pizza, you can't then just get a free Coke because you think you paid more than the pizza was worth or it had 5 less pepperoni on it than what YOU THOUGHT it should. However, if the pizza place gives you the wrong pizza, then it's perfectly reasonable to expect them to give you the right one, refund your money, or compensate you in some way that is satisfactory. If the pizza wasn't very good, it's fine to ask for your money back or another pizza...but not after you ate the whole thing. The bending over backwards to keep a customer happy is prevalent because some people know that they can get whatever they want if they complain enough, and that only breeds more entitlement because many people can't recognize the difference between entitlement, and getting what they actually paid for or how if once everything has been satisfied, they don't really deserve to get lots of other stuff too.

Obviously the metaphors and examples have to be applied on specific instances. Sometimes it's entitlement, other times it's just people upset with the product they got. So the term gets misused in both directions.

[MoveTheGlow]

This is an interesting analogy, and I love pizza, so I'll jump in.

Yes, you do have the right to demand your pizza is made the way you want. You don't want pineapple, they can do that. However, the ability or inability for the pizzeria to make the modifications you want is limited. Maybe the owner of the pizzeria would absolutely love to use only San Marzano tomatoes the way it would be in Italy or something, but it isn't possible. You can still demand it, but they can still deny it in the short run. Maybe your demand does influence their course in a year or so, changing suppliers/orders/prices to meet it, but it sure won't happen with that pizza you're ordering right now.

In the same way, you can demand that Coca-Cola manufacture the same soda in the United States that it releases in Mexico and most other countries - with cane sugar. It tastes better - unanimously, objectively better. They can do it, so why couldn't they do it for you? Well, hopefully your demand would align with so many others' demands that it couldn't be un-heard. That's when the change happens, because their profits depend on that change. Plants need to change equipment. Supply chains need to be redone. Entire suppliers need to be cut off. This doesn't happen tomorrow, it happens way later, and with zero acknowledgement to you, as an individual.

But if your demands can't give a business a viable, economically-sound reason to release a different (or better!) version of the thing you want, that's the end of it. They want kids to buy this game, and if it's on Fox News or CNN for its questionable rubbing mechanics, parents will balk. We're gonna buy it because we love Fire Emblem and that's a silly change that hardly affects anything. We're not the market they'll listen to. This is censorship, but it's censorship by potential money and risk assessment.

[Griever]

Okay... so he calls me idiot and that is perfectly fine but when I reply I get marked for "personal attack?" Great justice. /s

[Scatpants]

Keep saying get over it until everything you like gets hacked apart.

[SilverClock]

After reading the article, I found out that self-censorship is indeed a thing. Which makes the author of the article flat out wrong. Awkwaaardd.

[Heyxyz]

I will cry about censorship, because if people don't cry companies will keep doing it. Sure, now it may be minor things like "breast sliders" or "petting games," but soon we could have entire sections of the game removed in the name of censorship. I know that's a slippery slope, but if past gaming trends like DLC or microtransactions are anything to go by this slippery slope is very realistic.

Also, this is just me, but I hate it when companies decide if my region can handle something or not. By Nintendo's logic westerners must live like puritans...

[Chinkyinc18]

It really social media use by small, radical minorities (not minority as in race, but as a small part of the overall) who come together and scream loud as they can in a attempt to look like they are a bigger chuck of the population than they are AKA the blowfish technique. These groups know they within their own society and culture, the population knows they are small and radical and thus they can't really affect change. But, on the international stage, their presence looks as if they are a bigger part of the mainstream society. That's what leads to these preemptive self-censorships; if these companies DARE take a risk, they might realize these groups don't affect their sales.

Also, how is removing the Tomahawk class and adding a Cowboy class good? If I was an Indian, I'd be pissed that they took out exposure to my kind and replace with the WHITE (I type it like this to represent how every Indian person refers to Caucasians) man.

[rainslacker]

The extremist groups are very good at making it look like anyone who disagrees with them is either an idiot or hates something that normal people shouldn't hate. Most people don't say anything because they don't want to deal with having to justify themselves as a reasonable person, instead of some woman hating wife-beating redneck(example used for the topic here). Either that, or they just don't care or think it worth discussing because the reasonable discussion is practically non-existent.

The core value of the extremist we're talking about is actually usually reasonable. It's the absolute ridiculous proportions their reasoning and demands elevate to that are the problem. For instance, I personally don't feel that the core belief behind GamerGate or SJW(commonly used term) are at odds with one another even though they spur each other on. I believe most reasonable people would want the positive changes that both groups seek, but the two groups seem to put each other on the offensive, and the moderate discussion gets lost...like the whole topic of female representation in games completely vanished from the productive realm when Anita and Patricia decided to start their antics.

[Chinkyinc18]

Indeed, indeed...I was just discussing this with my rational, open-to-debate friends. The truth is we rational, compromising moderates are the true minority. All through history, moderates have not only been cast to a corner, but are persecuted by both sides for not having a black-and-white mentality. This is why like you said we tend to hide and conceal ourselves to avoid a one-sided debate as it is lose-lose situation no matter what you do or say. The real problem lies in our inherent nature, though. Rationality cannot win against irrationality, but as compromising people, we don't belief in extreme solutions. We, by our nature, want to be rational and compromise with them, even though we have realized it is damn near impossible. So, what do we do? That the trillion dollar question because if someone can figure that out, maybe real change with positive outcomes can happen, not all this 'You're wrong, and I'm right' nonsense.

[Lonnie18]

Why not cry? It means were not getting the developers true intended creative process!

[donwel]

When a company decides on its own to REMOVE content for the West to appease the human bacteria of entitled, whining, self righteous cry babies that proliferate in western society like crabs on a $10 whore, is it censorship? Yes, it is.

[Archmagel]

"Idea Factory" on censorship after the "Dead or Alive 3" problem: "That’s honestly their decision, but yes, sadly, it has stopped us from localizing certain Compile Heart games. We don’t want to censor anymore because we know that’s not true to the original developed art."

If a company is saying they have to remove content because of the herd of sheep that feminazis have obtained, then it is censorship. The government censorship spoken of in this article is also censorship. I hope you understand that both are censorship now, author.

[rainslacker]

Stop crying over sexism in games, and I feel that people wills stop crying over censorship in Japanese localizations eventually. At least the kind of censorship that is being talked about here. Kind of funny how one thing leads to another, because this sort of thing wasn't considered censorship before it actually was censorship. Thing is, most people aren't even really that mad at the devs/pubs over this, although they think they're backing down too easily.

The term sexist, objectify, and misogynistic are also terms which get misused on a frequent basis when it comes to Japanese imports. But God forbid we actually say that it isn't examples of that stuff.

[Derpy]

If it's edited over not being ported at all, I'm fine with it. I think people get way too uptight over censoring. A company has a right to do what they want with their property. If you want the game in it's original form, then why not learn a little Japanese and import it? This is better as most games lose a lot of their original context in translation anyway.