PS4 JRPG Has Fan-Service Images Censored Ahead Of Release In Japan

Furyu Corporation’s upcoming Japanese-only release of the rogue-lite JRPG based on the Yuragi-sou no Yuuna-san anime appears to be the next victim of Sony’s new anti-fan service policy that’s been put into place. The policy is designed to restrict developers in the East and the West from including certain kinds of ecchi content, sexual content, or interactive fan-service.

[gangsta_red]

Are we sure? Can we get an official first party translation team to verify this?

[FallenAngel1984]

Just watch TLOU2 contain some heavy sexual content while Sony continues this absurd practice of censorship

[gangsta_red]

Huge difference between what's being displayed in TLOU 2 and these types of games.

I understand where you're coming from but there's different levels of...acceptable violence and sexual themes as crazy as that sounds.

These games portray or imply that it's characters as very young...too young. Also add that they always seem to have a look of not wanting to be in the situation they're forced in and you have something that a lot of people may take issue with in Western society (maybe even eastern).

PS4 has broken through the mainstream and is in a lot of households with more people/children connected than ever before. Sony is definitely tightening the grip on these types of games as their world wide appeal is stronger and more eyes are on their content.

[Aura7541]

My counterargument against your point is that TLOU 2 relies heavily on realism. From the character models to the shading to the textures to the mocap, they are as realistic as the PS4/Pro can handle. Compare that to the anime/cartoon style of games such as Yuuna-san and Senran Kagura. From the bat, you already know that these games are not aiming for realism.

Overall, the claim that these games portray their characters as too young, as you put it, is your subjective opinion. In addition, because of the anime style as opposed to photorealism, these games inherently have a more solid wall between reality and fiction than TLOU.

[gangsta_red]

"From the bat, you already know that these games are not aiming for realism."

But because of this art style there is much more room to interpret that the females involved are underage.

"...is your subjective opinion."

Disagree, there is a lot of room to interpret just that with these anime drawings and we all know that these characters for these types of games are drawn with those intentions in mind. Unlike their western counterparts that absolutely do go for a more realistic older look in their characters.

And like I said before, it's not just how young these characters may look, but the certain positions they are put in and then how the player (you) actually interacts with them. Example, ripping the towel off this character that looks like a minor.

[Aura7541]

"But because of this art style there is much more room to interpret that the females involved are underage."

If there's that "much more room" to interpret, then the likelihood of the average interpretation to be more subjective than objective is greater. Because the pool of interpretations will widely vary, there will not be a consensus opinion. Overall, I do not see this point of yours as a refutation, at all, but an argument that further supports mine.

"Disagree, there is a lot of room to interpret just that with these anime drawings and we all know that these characters for these types of games are drawn with those intentions in mind. Unlike their western counterparts that absolutely do go for a more realistic older look in their characters."

I fail to see how this is a counterargument against my point. You're free to disagree, but disagreeing without elaboration does not make your case any stronger. In fact, you repeated the "lot/much more room to interpret" phrase again in which I will point to my first paragraph as a refutation against this portion of your response.

"And like I said before, it's not just how young these characters may look, but the certain positions they are put in and then how the player (you) actually interacts with them. Example, ripping the towel off this character that looks like a minor."

And how is this significant? How does this answer the "So what?" question? Even if I take your argument at face value, why should I or anyone else care? If what you're describing has no tangible negative affect on society, then what point are you trying to make?

I will happily concede to your point if you show empirical evidence that shows that sexual content has any negative effects in real life human interactions, i.e. an uptick of sexual harassment/assault charges. Jack Thompson's assertion that violent video games lead to a rise of real life violence was proven false, so I'm not holding my breath for you. Good luck on your research, though.

[gangsta_red]

"Overall, I do not see this point of yours as a refutation, at all, but an argument that further supports mine."

A point that supports mine more than yours is that Sony is actually censoring this content. We can sit here all day and talk about if the anime drawing looks of being underage is subjective but the fact is Sony is censoring this content for a reason and not the ultra realistic grittiness of TLOU and games like it.

With that in mind we can come to a logical conclusion of why this is. We can look at the games Sony is handing these restrictions too, look at the similarities these characters have with their ambiguous ages, look at what they're doing and what you can do to them and then pretty much know why this is happening.

There really is no point in your arguments on your end either, unless you can give me evidence on why Sony has decided to censor these types of games rather than TLOU other than the points I brought up.

"Because the pool of interpretations will widely vary, there will not be a consensus opinion"

But they will vary, and that is the point. I'm sure more people will sit there and debate if the girl in the pic above is underage or not, rather than coming to a definite over the age conclusion like if they saw the character Lara Croft.

"I will happily concede to your point if you show empirical evidence that shows that sexual content has any negative effects in real life human interactions"

Not really my point or any point here, but maybe if you could ask Sony this and perhaps tell them that it's okay to rip off towels and grope adolescent looking anime girls because they might not be that young cause it's all subjective...then maybe they might reverse this policy.

Won't be holding my breath either.

[Aura7541]

"A point that supports mine more than yours is that Sony is actually censoring this content. We can sit here all day and talk about if the anime drawing looks of being underage is subjective but the fact is Sony is censoring this content for a reason and not the ultra realistic grittiness of TLOU and games like it."

You claim that your point supports your argument more than mine, but you do not elaborate further than that. Claiming that Sony is censoring content for a reason is not an argument either as you do not cite that reason nor do you try to prove how that reason is valid.

"With that in mind we can come to a logical conclusion of why this is. We can look at the games Sony is handing these restrictions too, look at the similarities these characters have with their ambiguous ages, look at what they're doing and what you can do to them and then pretty much know why this is happening. "

And yet, these games were around on the PS4, PS3, and PSV prior to the implementation of this policy. This is evidence against your point because the existence of the games that have lewd content before has not led to any outrage or negative consequence. So you can tell me to look at what they're doing, but that is not an argument. This is mere pontification.

"There really is no point in your arguments on your end either, unless you can give me evidence on why Sony has decided to censor these types of games rather than TLOU other than the points I brought up."

Why are you asking me provide evidence for an argument I never claimed? That is not how a debate works. Only hold me accountable for the arguments I actually make. This also means you are accountable for the arguments you made, particularly this one: "These games portray or imply that it's characters as very young...too young. Also add that they always seem to have a look of not wanting to be in the situation they're forced in and you have something that a lot of people may take issue with in Western society (maybe even eastern)."

You say that a lot of people may take issue in Western society. However, you failed to specify what counts as "a lot" nor have you cited the specific "issue". I decided to interpret the issue as sexual content will lead to negative real life consequences, hence why I asked you to show me evidence for that. Why did I take that interpretation? Because actual child porn is deemed illegal because it involves actual children being exploited for nefarious purposes and can cause longterm psychological harm.

"But they will vary, and that is the point. I'm sure more people will sit there and debate if the girl in the pic above is underage or not, rather than coming to a definite over the age conclusion like if they saw the character Lara Croft."

Okay? You're just repeated what I just said and this is not really a counterargument, either. I argued that because interpretations will widely vary, the amount of subjectivity will be relatively high. However, if we want to decide on something, it better be on objective terms.

"Not really my point or any point here, but maybe if you could ask Sony this and perhaps tell them that it's okay to rip off towels and grope adolescent looking anime girls because they might not be that young cause it's all subjective...then maybe they might reverse this policy.

Won't be holding my breath either."

Nice try at pivoting to a different topic. Now, how about I ask you if you should really care if people play those types of games if having access to that content does not lead to actual negative consequences in society? And for what reason? Why should you care what games other people play? Does it affect you, personally?

[The_Sage]

Agree, red. The games that are being censored seem to be those that depict nudity with childlike faces. You notice that they leave other games like grand theft auto, outlast, and others that depict nudity alone.

[gangsta_red]

@Aura7541
"Claiming that Sony is censoring content for a reason is not an argument either as you do not cite that reason nor do you try to prove how that reason is valid."

Okay, now you're just trying to not make any sense or your being willfully ignorant. Because I have stated in each of my replies plus my OP the reasons Sony are censoring these games and not others like GTA, TLOU and the likes. You have't made any valid points yourself and you haven't provided any proof to support your claims and yet you continue to ask some from me.

"However, if we want to decide on something, it better be on objective terms."

Again, that is not my point, and you continue to fail to see it as you keep repeating your own that makes little sense in response.

"However, you failed to specify what counts as "a lot" nor have you cited the specific "issue""

You keep asking me for specifications and yet you haven't provided any legit info yourself. I have specified the issues many times and now this discussion with you has officially become you just countering everything I say with just being purposely obtuse.

The fact that you haven't even addressed the reasons Sony themselves have censored this content and why as suppose to other games with violence and sexual themes only further proves you have no actual points to make.

"Nice try at pivoting to a different topic."

That would be you as I never once said I took issue with these games, you made the topic about me which was never the case. The topic was why Sony is censoring these games, then you decided to ask me for some type of evidence on something that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

"Why should you care what games other people play? Does it affect you, personally?"

Again, off topic and not the point, you shifting the discussion making this about me. Please point to exactly where I said that I care what people play, point to the comments I made that these games affect me personally?

Then, while your answering that maybe you can finally answer my original question as to why you think Sony would censor these games and not others.

[Aura7541]

"Okay, now you're just trying to not make any sense or your being willfully ignorant. Because I have stated in each of my replies plus my OP the reasons Sony are censoring these games and not others like GTA, TLOU and the likes. You have't made any valid points yourself and you haven't provided any proof to support your claims and yet you continue to ask some from me."

And I refuted your points by pointing at how TLOU relies more on realism whereas Japanese games such as Senran Kagura rely more on the anime artstyle.

Your claim that the characters in these Japanese games are "too young" is your subjective opinion. And even if I were to pretend that your claim is a direct objective observation, that is all it is: an observation. Observations are not arguments.

"Again, that is not my point, and you continue to fail to see it as you keep repeating your own that makes little sense in response."

You claim that Sony's censorship is justified because there is a huge difference between what's being displayed in TLOU 2 and Japanese games such as Senran Kagura and eroge VNs. The difference that you identified was that the Japanese games implied (which is far from a certainty) that the female characters were "too young".

My counterargument against this point was that photorealism and an anime artstyle inherently will give different impressions, as one is more geared towards imitating reality as close as possible while the other is more cartoony. The intrinsic wall between reality and fiction, therefore, is thicker when it comes to anime-style games.

"You keep asking me for specifications and yet you haven't provided any legit info yourself. I have specified the issues many times and now this discussion with you has officially become you just countering everything I say with just being purposely obtuse. "

Tu quoque fallacy: https://www.logicallyfallac...

Your complaints have nothing to do with the fact that you have not specified anything. All you have done is use vague language. The one who is being obtuse is you because when being called out on your fallacies, you immediately resort to the "Well, you're doing it, too!" whining.

[Aura7541]

"The fact that you haven't even addressed the reasons Sony themselves have censored this content and why as suppose to other games with violence and sexual themes only further proves you have no actual points to make."

I already done that in my very first response and showed how whatever reasons Sony has are invalid. Your counterargument against my first response falls short, too, as having wide interpretations is grounds to relatively high subjectivity. This is why making conclusions on empirical, objective evidence is important because there will be little room for interpretation. In contrast, reliance on handwaving dismissal like what you're doing now is not an argument.

"That would be you as I never once said I took issue with these games, you made the topic about me which was never the case. The topic was why Sony is censoring these games, then you decided to ask me for some type of evidence on something that has nothing to do with the topic at hand. "

Yes, you do take issue with these games because you, yourself, said that the female characters are "too young" in your opinion. In addition, you also said that it's about "the certain positions they are put in and then how the player (you) actually interacts with them. Example, ripping the towel off this character that looks like a minor." This is an issue that you particularly specified, but you did not give reasons why.

I asked you how this is a problem because for this type of content to be problematic, it needs to have caused actual harm. This was why I asked for evidence for the claim that games with sexual content lead to real life sexual assault/harassment cases. Here are some studies I have that show how porn is linked to lower amounts of sexual assault:

http://www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/...
https://www.springer.com/ab...

The second link particularly looks at the relationship between child pornography and the rate of child sex abuse. Do note that I do not endorse child pornography. I think it should be illegal because children cannot consent to sexual acts.

The second study that I referenced also bolsters my argument tremendously over yours because unlike the Japanese games that I mentioned, child pornography involves actual real life children. And yet, it is linked to lower rates of child sex abuse. The female characters in the games are purely fictional. They are not real and they do not look real.

[Aura7541]

"Again, off topic and not the point, you shifting the discussion making this about me. Please point to exactly where I said that I care what people play, point to the comments I made that these games affect me personally?

Then, while your answering that maybe you can finally answer my original question as to why you think Sony would censor these games and not others."

You definitely care because the arguments you're making are subjective. Effectively, you are putting your own opinions and thoughts into the discussion rather than making objective statements.

In addition, the question you want me to answer was asked AFTER I asked you my questions: "And how is this significant? How does this answer the "So what?" question? Even if I take your argument at face value, why should I or anyone else care? If what you're describing has no tangible negative affect on society, then what point are you trying to make?"

As a result, you were pivoting to something that is irrelevant to the discussion as your question has very little relation to mine. I am not obligated to answer your question because of that. The reply chain is here for everyone to see.

[rainslacker]

In the case of this franchise, I can only think of one character who is drawn to appear too young. I haven't watched many of the shows in this anime, but I don't recall that particular character being an object of overtly sexual fan service....although I wouldn't say it doesn't exist, because this series is fairly open with it's portrayal of nudity and sexual innuendo.

Otherwise, from what I've seen, all the characters appear to be teenagers who are old enough, or at least their early twenties.

The problem with the generalizations like you make, implies that every game is like this, when in fact, it's being applied to games which don't have characters who appear too young.

I think they're making a mistake here, because if they ever do decide to do away with this policy due to push back from the community, then it's only going to be highlighted that they allow this stuff. Plus, I feel the slippery slope is too great, and who's to say the next thing that people take offense over isn't next on the agenda.

No matter what, everything that is portrayed in video games is going to upset someone, and in the past, Sony has never been overly concerned with people having a false perception of them. They've been a pretty open system to make games on, and that to me is much better than trying to maintain a family friendly image.

As far as interpretation goes, i understand the argument when people use it, but like I said, the generalization about all these niche games being like this is being applied across the board here. For instance, Dead or Alive has no underage characters, drawn or otherwise....except maybe that new one they did as DLC, although she's actually of age, just dressed in a cute dollish way. DOA has content that could be considered inappropriate....like the Vita version with a "fondling" simulator. Now, in that instance, the features was pretty stupid, and added nothing to the game. but it was fan service, and didn't really cause any harm. But it appears under Sony's new rules, such things may not be appropriate.

It seems the issue here isn't really that it's based on underage characters, but rather that it's based on the simulation of potentially sexual or erotic/intimate acts in which the player can control that interaction. Outright explicit sex has always been banned from the systems, but implied sex never has been, nor the portrayal of nudity...although many devs toned it down for the west. But in Japan, this didn't usually happen. So, Sony seems to have gone from a fairly open platform, to one that is much more puritan in it's acceptance policies.

[AspiringProGenji]

Lesbian kiss is different from tentacle porn and matures having 10 inch d*cks. Just sayin...

[FallenAngel1984]

@ gangsta

I’m stop you right there because Sony is not your parents. Games have ratings for a reason. Sony doesn’t ban games like GTAV that allow you to get prostitutes and naked lap dances that even allow you to get first person viewing angles of each act because the people who buy those games know what they’re getting into. With that same logic these games shouldn’t be getting censored.

PS1 dramatically brought gaming more into mainstream than the generation before it, yet it didn’t have intense censorship as a response to it. PS2 was an even more popular console yet it had even more mature content. There’s no justification for this on PS4.

@ Asp

You really comparing full on hentai to ecchi content?

[gangsta_red]

@FallenAngel1984
"Sony is not your parents. Games have ratings for a reason"

It really has nothing to do with that statement you left. It's about what image Sony is now trying to establish with it's game catalog on their own system and they have decided that they don't want this type of content from these types of games.

"...yet it didn’t have intense censorship as a response to it."

Pretty sure it did with games like Manhunt 2, BMX XXX, The Punisher game was censored, Thrill Kill was cancelled because of it's violence. Granted those games weren't necessarily banned or censored by Sony but I'm sure Sony caught hell for those too.

And you're not even addressing one of my main reasons that Sony might be doing this. Even if you can get a naked lap dance or beat up a prostitute in GTA, you know what you can't do, grope, chain and inappropriately touch a female character that is drawn to look like she's 12-15 years old.

[The_Sage]

I'm with gangsta here. Anyone with eyes can see that the faces on these characters are childlike. They're then shown in sexual situations which is... Well... Disturbing to say the least. Staying that they're not real girls does not change what the the image portrays.

[The_Sage]

They're sick... I think anyone that enjoys this type of thing should be tracked as a possible pedophile.

[FallenAngel1984]

Sony’s already had more than 20 years establishing its image as a mature brand that caters to every demographic. There’s little reason to backpedal on something that people already associate the brand with.

Bringing up Manhunt 2 is pointless because that games was originally AO rated, something no hardware manufacturer in the right mind would allow to be released on their platform.

As for the other titles, of course a few games did get censored here and there but it was nowhere near as standardized as Sony is enforcing now with these niche titles.

How these characters are drawn should have little to do with anything. First of all most of these characters are usually depicted in their late teens. Second of all it’s a cultural thing that no amount of censorship is ever going to change. You’re still going to see various eastern media have this sort of stuff in it. Lastly if you’re buying a game like this you already know what type of fan service will be in it. There’s little reason to be upset by any of this when people who are familiar with the source material should know what to expect before they even buy the game.

Here’s a simple answer to people who aren’t comfortable with the content. If you don’t like it don’t buy. Don’t try to control what people already enjoy for your own PC agenda.

[rainslacker]

To me, I saw no real issue or criticism thrown their way about these games being on the systems they offered. The stuff that did exist was pretty innocuous, and never made any headway, ,and the number of people who made a big deal about it as a derogatory towards Sony, usually did so in an effort to put down a system(Vita) or the people who played them....often by wrongy attributing the nature of the content in the games that existed, and extending that to any Otaku style game which may have any level of fan service.

But, now that Sony has made it an issue that they feel they need to address, for whatever reason they are doing it, then if they decide to do away with the policy, you're going to see a lot more people coming in and saying that they're complacent with the original notion that they somehow support kiddie porn, or some other such nonsense, and there will be even more ethnocentric comments about how creepy the Japanese are, or how the entire society in Japan are pedophiles without ever once understanding the nature of the content, or the new argument about how these characters seem like they're in some sort of distress when placed in these situations.

What bugs me the most about these new policies, assuming they actually exist, is that I'm an Otaku gamer. I love the Japanese style, and when I play these games, I want them to be with the Japanese culture attached to them.

I don't want everything to be Westernized.

i don't want localizations that are watered down because some people that won't even consider the game either way are maybe going to get upset about the content.

I don't want content to be removed from any game if its the creators vision...although I will concede that there are some instances where it's understandable because there is a fairly global consensus on what is acceptable to portray.

But most of all....i don't want the console makers to be the sole arbiter of what is considered appropriate in the market place. I accept that these console makers are within their rights to decide what can go on their systems, but I think it's a bad path to take to allow them to decide for us, what is appropriate for us on such a large scale....particularly when it deals with cultural differences and seems aimed more at trying to protect their reputation, rather than promoting free expression.

[Felix_Argyle_Catbro]

It's obvious that this won't last. People will stop buying these games which causes huge uproar and Sony will give up their ridiculous shit.

[Cobra951]

People will just go elsewhere for this and saucier content. PC is open, and the internet even more so. (2D games can even be played in a browser.) What this move says to me is that Sony have decided to distance themselves from prurient cartoons. I'm sure they've done a cost/benefit analysis before they lowered the boom. I'd be shocked if they didn't know it was going to cost them some sales and perhaps even the support of some developers. Odds are they knew it all along, and still figured that in the current repressive social climate, censorship would help the bottom line more than hinder it.

[kreate]

Plus the potential negative press from mainstream who doesnt play games.

Here's hoping gamers complain and Sony comes around.

[TheGamez100]

Ugh....please go with nintendo and pc jp devs. Damnit sony, first crossplay and now this. Why? Its been completely fine for years but why now? Butthurt sjws?

[ApocalypseShadow]

I see a lot of crying over censorship. Mostly from the few that like these games where it looks like underage girls with big boobs in compromising positions. Makes you wonder about some people.

Sony can decide what goes on their system because it's their system to do it. Porn is not on the system. And hentai like images aren't supported either in western countries that would make a stink about it. Gamers made a huge stink about a lesbian kiss that is supported in western countries. By a character already known to be a lesbian.

PC allows this type of thing because it's general purpose. Steam has these type of games that are allowed because it's on PC. And Valve just loves royalty profits over morality and ethics. Nintendo might allow it as they don't have enough third party games or Indie games to support it between the in house releases that are too spaced apart where you are waiting for new games. But games like this aren't going to help sell the system. And, a big media stink in this modern age could only hurt future PS4 console sales. Maybe Sony doesn't want to take the risk.

Just because you might be able to handle it doesn't mean young children with a PS4 should have the images in front of them. It looking like a cartoon doesn't help matters where cartoons are looked at as innocent for them to see. Yes, parenting should be involved. But with the cartoon look, they might miss it with its adult like subliminal messaging.

[King_Noctis]

“Sony can decide what goes on their system because it's their system to do it. Porn is not on the system.”

The thing is, this is not porn. It just cartoon/anime graphic. And what if it is borderline porn? Steam allow it. Hell, even Nintendo allow it. There are no excuse at all and the ones you are making for Sony are reaching at best.

[ApocalypseShadow]

Maybe you didn't SEE the PERIOD right after the word "system." Then, I said most western markets don't support images of child like characters with big boobs with barely any close usually in compromising positions. Maybe Sony is cleaning up their image of having these type of things on their system.

Just because you bought their product doesn't give you the right to run their business how you see fit . Don't like it? There's the door. Sony doesn't allow porn either but PS4 is mostly bought by adults between 17-34. Where's the uproar that porn games are not on the system? Where's the outrage?

We all know that some Japanese men have this fascination with young school girls and young images of girls for their viewing pleasure. You might say, "Well, if they are looking at the images as an outlet for their fascination, they might not go out and touch real young girls." That's quite possible.

Or, it might make them go out and want to touch REAL underage girls for their pleasure. That's perfectly possible too. Right? Why is it acceptable at all should be your question.

[King_Noctis]

What you fail to understand is almost all of Japanese’s games have some sort of erotic fan service be it Persona, Final Fantasy, Yakuza (especially Kiwami 2, with the first scene with Haruka).

Japanese games have those kind of things since before Sony try to ban them. And you know what? Back then it did not make those pervert Japanese to go out and “want to touch REAL underage girls for their pleasure” either.

Your excuse for Sony make no sense at all. If the PS4 is mostly bought by adults between 17-34, then they are old enough to think what is right or wrong by themselves without Sony handholding them and telling them what to see and what not to.

[rainslacker]

And when they do it with games that aren't drawn with ambiguously aged girls does the same argument apply?

I'm tired of this argument that all these games are akin to kiddie porn, because that usually isn't the case, and never has been.

This also isn't porn. It's sexually suggestive, but I can't recall there ever being an instance of a sexually explicit scene. About all you ever get is some heavy flirting, and more recently some heavy petting with implied climaxes.

Suggestive and subliminal are completely different things, and I can't imagine any parent could watch one of these games and not recognize instantly that they aren't appropriate for children. Parents nowadays aren't idiots, and the ones with young kids nowadays grew up during the rise of anime. Parents today may be neglectful, but they certainly aren't unaware of what this content can contain.

[Kashima]

#FuckSony

[ChiefofLoliPolice]

Will guess ill start getting my niche JRPGs on PC now.

[Cobra951]

Yes, or in some form of streamed or browser content, which can be accessed on any internet-connected device (perhaps even Sony systems?). Sony have to know this move comes at a cost, and they have decided to eat that cost, in expectation of a greater benefit in return.