Western "Censorship" In Star Ocean: Integrity and Faithlessness

Not to encourage young girls showing their skimoy underwear. Sounds like you're all for teenage girls in their underwear. That's.... Well okay....

Have blood have gore, have sexuality. Let's just try to not model young kids that way.

It's just as creepy as the guys who had a countdown for Emma Watson to hit 18. That's weird, she's still young. It's not a magical number.

Japanese games are happy to sexualize young girls and yes as a western i find that so smurfing weird. It's not a just "don't look" kind if option it's a that makes me feel uncomfortable. If the girl looked older, than that's more acceptable but kids are kids and we shouldn't sexualize them.

As someone who had so much pressure as a teen to be "sexy" and acted older than I should have, having characters be this way just creates even more issues for girls who are like how I was.

So no. People have body pillows of these type of characters. Or various other word stuff. People aren't sensible. And that's what's sooooo weird.

The tracer stuff, that's alright. the character IS older and acts and looks it. It's no big deal. this character looks young and that's weird.

If you can't see an issue with a young girl showing her underwear off, pixelated or not, I'm worried. From your response though you're missing the youn girl point and latching on the "well violence is okay why not boobs!" And that wasn't the point. It was the character being so young. That's what's I'm arguing so please try to re-read and argue the point mentioned first.

It's okay to want boobs. That's alright. Have boobs and cleavage, I've never said not to. Just don't sexaulize teens and don't do something that's out of character for a character in an effort to make them sexy, that's weird.

Also, I'm super relaxed BTW, laying in bed ATM. So please stop telling me to relax. Just because I share a differing opinion doesn't mean I'm throwing fits. You'll do best to understand that in these here internet conversations.

Are the people who watch the young girl's panties actively going out to see rl minors panties? No? Then shut up and let them watch all their loli panties and hentai that they want. Whatever makes someone happy and does not harm anyone else is not something anyone should have any sort of problem with, period. That is all there is to it.

Sorry to disappoint you, but I'm not planning to go out on the street and molest the first child I see just because I don't see a problem with panties on a pre-18 year old in a video game, just as I am not going to go out and buy a gun just because I like shooting demons in DooM. So you can take your worry for my mental health back, thank you, I don't need it.

As for the people who do molest young girls or want to see their panties, those would have done so whether or not they could see video game panties or not, so even then there is no argument against this, just as there's none with violence.

Putting all of that aside, I would also like to inform you that people do think about sex and have sexual interests long before they're eightteen. Sex does not suddenly "switch on" when someone becomes eightteen. So if a fifteen, sixteen or even nineteen year old is interested in a fifteen or sixteen year old's attractiveness, know what that is? Natural. I know, it's unbelievable, but true.

Also, you do need to relax, given you feel the need to be worried over things that are not at all worrisome. So yes, relax. People have weird interests, it happens, it's okay, chill out, relax, breeeaaaathe, there's no mass conspiracy to make you like teen panties, nor are you surrounded by would-be teen-rapists. There is absolutely nothing for you to be worried about if you would just mind your own business and let people like what they like and do what they want (bearing in mind nobody else gets hurt or damaged - without consent, that is, as some people are in to pain - by what they like or do, of course, as I said before). Relax.

Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno

Originally Posted by Fox

I know, I was looking at 250 Eurogamer comments earlier. It's baffling why it's such a big deal.

Do you think we can treat every change in the same way? Did the SJWs force Square to include airships in FFXV?

I think there's a lot of hiding behind "protecting the artistic vision" from people who are actually just interested in seeing sexy butts. And it's fine to want to see sexy butts, I'm sure many of us here on eoff are fans of such, I just wish we could admit that's what it's about.

Attachment 67736

I don't think I ever "this'd" so much, you guys. This is exactly the point I made when I made a thread on a similar topic waaay back.

Originally Posted by Elpizo

Are the people who watch the young girl's panties actively going out to see rl minors panties? No? Then shut up and let them watch all their loli panties and hentai that they want. Whatever makes someone happy and does not harm anyone else is not something anyone should have any sort of problem with, period. That is all there is to it.

Do actually agree with this.

Originally Posted by Freya

So no. People have body pillows of these type of characters. Or various other word stuff. People aren't sensible. And that's what's sooooo weird.

Hi! I have a daki of an anime character. Canonically in the show she's 17. Is that why I like her? No, I just like her design. I don't think you can really apply the same standards to fictional characters because a) they're not real and cannot be exploited and b) they often look nothing like actual humans look like. You can create a character that you'd guess is 30 years old and say "actually she's 15". Is that creepy? With characters like this age is just a number in the biography, it's pretty meaningless.

HAVING SAID THAT...

As someone who had so much pressure as a teen to be "sexy" and acted older than I should have, having characters be this way just creates even more issues for girls who are like how I was.

I totally get this, and can definitely see why it can make people uncomfortable especially when you're deliberately trying to make your underage characters sex objects. To have "Here's a young character who also happens to be cute" is one thing, to say "Here's a young character we've put in effort to make you lust over" is somewhat different. Now, for the reasons above I'm not convinced there's anything inherently wrong with the latter for the people who enjoy it, but it's clear that others will feel uncomfortable with it and it's probably not material you want to expose actual kids to.

With that in mind, maybe a mass market RPG isn't the most sensible place for it.

Originally Posted by Elpizo

Sorry to disappoint you, but I'm not planning to go out on the street and molest the first child I see just because I don't see a problem with panties on a pre-18 year old in a video game, just as I am not going to go out and buy a gun just because I like shooting demons in DooM. So you can take your worry for my mental health back, thank you, I don't need it.

As for the people who do molest young girls or want to see their panties, those would have done so whether or not they could see video game panties or not, so even then there is no argument against this, just as there's none with violence.

Putting all of that aside, I would also like to inform you that people do think about sex and have sexual interests long before they're eightteen. Sex does not suddenly "switch on" when someone becomes eightteen. So if a fifteen, sixteen or even nineteen year old is interested in a fifteen or sixteen year old's attractiveness, know what that is? Natural. I know, it's unbelievable, but true.

I doubt Freya was trying to imply you're some kind of closet molester just 'cuz you like short skirts on Star Ocean characters.

To be honest I don't even know the first thing about Star Ocean or its characters, having never played any of the games and no real intent to do so any time soon, so there's no real personal stake for me in this and I honestly have no real preference to long or short skirts on these characters. Just using it as an example to make my point, in this case.

Thing is, I'm not saying Freya can't be uncomfortable with it, or that anyone can't be uncomfortable with it (as long as they're not trying to actively hinder anyone who is comfortable with it from being comfortable with it, that is), I'm just arguing that that's no real reason to put this censorship into place. Let people decide for themselves what they want, is what I'm trying to say in the end. Those who are uncomfortable with panty shots can then opt to not buy the game or to not play with that character or take care to never aim their camera that way, while those who love it can stare at their video game panties all day long.

But having the choice made for us, as if all western gamers have a phobia of panties or wouldn't understand or would be uncomfortable with it, just feels belittling. I can make up my own mind, tyvm, developers, so I would like the option of choice. There's no need to talk down to us like this. We're not fragile and we don't need sheltering from things that you think will weird us out. Let me decide if I find it weird or not, so that I can then make a decision of what to do next.

If Freya doesn't want to buy Star Ocean because there are teen panties in it, that's fine, her choice. If Steve wants to buy Star Ocean because it has teen panties in it, his choice, he can do so. However, the line for me is drawn if Freya wants to take away Steve's teen panties because she's uncomfortable with it. If Steve is not hurting anyone (without their consent), nobody, not Freya nor anyone else, has the right to take away Steve's video game teen panties, no matter how weird she thinks Steve is.

Because if we're honestly going to censor things because people are 'uncomfortable' with certain matters, well... Do I really need to point out how slippery that slope is?

You're arguing for more teen panties to be shown. You know how odd that sounds?

Slippery slope? You sound like the twitter guy. End of the world if a teen character shows less butt. Oh no.

This isn't to call out for every boob and butt to be censored, it's requesting that teens don't show off their underwear as that promotes the mentality that it's okay to look at young girls in such a way. You can think that way, you can like that stuff, it isn't a war against thoughts. That doesn't mean those thoughts of wanting teenage underwear is an okay thing. Pixelated, animated, or not. Just because you can think that way and decide that's okay, doesn't mean it is a respectable thought and opinion to have for others. You're free to have it, and i'm free to say it's weird and uncomfortable. But why do you and the strange choices of a Japanese developer get to dictate that that is okay? Culturally in japan it is more acceptable to be creepy about it and show young girls like that. In western markets it's not. Changing things to fit culturally with other markets isn't a bad thing, it's respectable to those cultures.

I don't have a phobia of panties, or butts, or cleavage. Far from it. I just don't think it's healthy to promote the attraction to teens in a sexual manner.

Damn, I didn't think I'd find this crossover into EOFF. I don't really care for that trout. I mean good. I find it interesting that all the people I've seen defending it on the net are men.

Considering all media is geared to cater to the male gaze and men have become accustomed that they get everything they want from the media, it's no surprise that they're acting butthurt that someone is taking away something they usually get handed to them on a plate.

Originally Posted by Elpizo

Because if we're honestly going to censor things because people are 'uncomfortable' with certain matters, well... Do I really need to point out how slippery that slope is?

Again - not censorship. Not even close to censorship.

To be clear - censorship happens when people's free speech is systemically limited. Think letters that get intercepted with important data erased out with a marker, or being thrown into jail for saying (not even acting on - just saying) a political opinion that is different from what the government allows, or newspapers being banned from posting anything else than what the government allows because other content could threaten their authority.

A company willingly deciding to cover up a character in their game for a foreign release to avoid backlash stemming from Values Dissonance is not censorship in any stretch of the word.

Originally Posted by Freya

You're arguing for more teen panties to be shown. You know how odd that sounds?

You're arguing that because you don't like something, it shouldn't be made, nor should anyone like it and if anyone does like it they should be ashamed of themselves. You are judgemental, selfish and deluded, thinking you and you alone have the right to decide how everyone else should feel about something you don't like.

Slippery slope? You sound like the twitter guy. End of the world if a teen character shows less butt. Oh no.

Sorry, but that's not what I said at all, because you don't want to pay attention to what I say, you just want to posture yourself as if morally superior and holier than thou. Here, I shall spell it out for you, your righteousness: I did not say no teenage butts are the end of the world. I said that censoring something because it makes someone uncomfortable is a questionable practice, for reasons that should be obvious. There is always someone going to be offended or uncomfortable with something.

Shall we ban homosexuality from games too? Lots of people uncomfortable with that. Shall we ban black people from appearing in games? I can think of quite a few people uncomfortable with that. How about murder? Lots of people uncomfortable with that. Brown coloured buildings, some people find that uncomfortable. Etc.

But let me guess. "Those are TOTALLY different things!" right? Your whole shtick with "we shouldn't encourage such thoughts" reeks of tunnel-vissioned hypocrisy, because again, murder, violence, theft, racism, all of those are perfectly okay in your book, else you'd be vehemently arguing for the censorship of those too. None of those things I mentioned is culturally accepted by any culture, by the way, we all think those things are bad. Except you're not doing that. Not a peep. You don't think having games where you get to snipe other people in the head, or hack and slash a whole city's population, or committing robberies or paid assassinations encourages bad thoughts? Some games even revel in how they glorify murder, violence and bloodshed, but none of that makes you pause? Not even a second?

How convenient.

Clearly when it comes to violence, we can handle ourselves and you trust us to be able to behave acceptably, but when it comes to sex, obviously western men are cavemen beasts barely restraining themselves from raping everything in sight who are obviously in need of righteous women such as yourself to lecture them about what they can or cannot do in real life as soon as a teenage girl's panties get flashed by accident. Thank god you were there to tell me that if I went out on the street and grabbed a girl to see her panties, I'd be doing a very bad thing and should be arrested, I never would have guessed! I mean, it was in a video game, so I thought it would be okay, just like last week when I went on a shooting spree in my local grocery store because DooM taught me to do so, but thankfully, thanks to you saying how despicable and weird I am, I know totally better! I never would have been able to conclude this on my own!

And end sarcasm.

Going to practice mass murder in Dark Souls now for my killing spree next week in my town square, as the game clearly encourages me to do so and since nobody changed it, it means it's perfectly okay to have such thoughts.

Why yes, I'm taking the urine now, because the whole argument of "encouraging bad thoughts" is bollocks.

Originally Posted by Fox

Originally Posted by Elpizo

Because if we're honestly going to censor things because people are 'uncomfortable' with certain matters, well... Do I really need to point out how slippery that slope is?

Again - not censorship. Not even close to censorship.

I'm really not going to argue the semantics of what to call it, since it's hardly relevant. Point is they changed something when I feel they shouldn't have, because we're not all braindead and can understand to not repeat certain things in real life that we do in games. Call it censorship, call it editing, call it rainbowskyfishing, doesn't really matter to me.

Reminder to not personally attack other members. Cut it out.

Look, Elipzo, I can see we fundamentally disagree what is okay and what isn't okay. That's not going to change. You're okay with teen underwear, I am not. And that's okay to have differences like that.

But changing something ever so slightly to fit a cultural market isn't a bad thing. It's showing respect for other cultures. That's what square enix did. It isn't them changing their whole vision. It's just them being respectful, which is a good thing and more people should be more respectful to others.

Going to practice mass murder in Dark Souls now for my killing spree next week in my town square, as the game clearly encourages me to do so and since nobody changed it, it means it's perfectly okay to have such thoughts.

At work and can't reply in detail, but false equivalency much?

Originally Posted by Elpizo

To be honest I don't even know the first thing about Star Ocean or its characters, having never played any of the games and no real intent to do so any time soon, so there's no real personal stake for me in this and I honestly have no real preference to long or short skirts on these characters. Just using it as an example to make my point, in this case.

Thing is, I'm not saying Freya can't be uncomfortable with it, or that anyone can't be uncomfortable with it (as long as they're not trying to actively hinder anyone who is comfortable with it from being comfortable with it, that is), I'm just arguing that that's no real reason to put this censorship into place. Let people decide for themselves what they want, is what I'm trying to say in the end. Those who are uncomfortable with panty shots can then opt to not buy the game or to not play with that character or take care to never aim their camera that way, while those who love it can stare at their video game panties all day long.

But having the choice made for us, as if all western gamers have a phobia of panties or wouldn't understand or would be uncomfortable with it, just feels belittling. I can make up my own mind, tyvm, developers, so I would like the option of choice. There's no need to talk down to us like this. We're not fragile and we don't need sheltering from things that you think will weird us out. Let me decide if I find it weird or not, so that I can then make a decision of what to do next.

If Freya doesn't want to buy Star Ocean because there are teen panties in it, that's fine, her choice. If Steve wants to buy Star Ocean because it has teen panties in it, his choice, he can do so. However, the line for me is drawn if Freya wants to take away Steve's teen panties because she's uncomfortable with it. If Steve is not hurting anyone (without their consent), nobody, not Freya nor anyone else, has the right to take away Steve's video game teen panties, no matter how weird she thinks Steve is.

Because if we're honestly going to censor things because people are 'uncomfortable' with certain matters, well... Do I really need to point out how slippery that slope is?

You seem to be operating under the idea that people are "afraid" of panties or that people "think it's weird" to want to look at them. People are not afraid of panties. Have you ever considered that young girls and women don't want to be sexualized, and that this kind of portrayal encourages that sexualization?

It is harmful to women in real time, in real life. Worse; it sexualizes young girls, and they in turn have to deal with that from men and boys who play these games. Your horrifying arguments of "are people running around molesting children in real life?! NO?!" are perplexing. You flat out don't know that; there's no way that you could. Additionally, it is a different argument completely from video game violence vs. real life violence. Sexual objectification from characters being portrayed this way can be exhibited in real life on a much smaller scale that does not lead to bloodshed in the streets with twenty dead, but it still affects people (women) in a very real way. It also lets men get away with it in a very real way.

It's honestly outrageously offensive for you to sit here posting about how it doesn't harm anyone and how people should just be allowed their sexual perversions along with your fearmongering about "a slippery slope" of censorship. The fact that you so easily boil it down to "it's not hurting anyone" is a direct objectification of women and young girls because in saying that, you validate real-life sexualization in the same way; that "it's not hurting anyone." That de-humanizes us. You are wrong that it does not hurt anyone. It hurts us.

It's not "a slippery slope of censorship." It's something that we would like to have stop happening because it affects us in real life. We would like to stop being sexualized and having young girls be sexualized. Arguing that video games do not encourage that is false. Every sexualization and objectification encourages it, period. Not only that, it is horrifyingly alarming that you are making these arguments with tones of pedophilia apologism and trying to normalize these concepts.

This shouldn't even be in line with censorship. It should be in line with human decency.

Originally Posted by Shorty

Originally Posted by Elpizo

To be honest I don't even know the first thing about Star Ocean or its characters, having never played any of the games and no real intent to do so any time soon, so there's no real personal stake for me in this and I honestly have no real preference to long or short skirts on these characters. Just using it as an example to make my point, in this case.

Thing is, I'm not saying Freya can't be uncomfortable with it, or that anyone can't be uncomfortable with it (as long as they're not trying to actively hinder anyone who is comfortable with it from being comfortable with it, that is), I'm just arguing that that's no real reason to put this censorship into place. Let people decide for themselves what they want, is what I'm trying to say in the end. Those who are uncomfortable with panty shots can then opt to not buy the game or to not play with that character or take care to never aim their camera that way, while those who love it can stare at their video game panties all day long.

But having the choice made for us, as if all western gamers have a phobia of panties or wouldn't understand or would be uncomfortable with it, just feels belittling. I can make up my own mind, tyvm, developers, so I would like the option of choice. There's no need to talk down to us like this. We're not fragile and we don't need sheltering from things that you think will weird us out. Let me decide if I find it weird or not, so that I can then make a decision of what to do next.

If Freya doesn't want to buy Star Ocean because there are teen panties in it, that's fine, her choice. If Steve wants to buy Star Ocean because it has teen panties in it, his choice, he can do so. However, the line for me is drawn if Freya wants to take away Steve's teen panties because she's uncomfortable with it. If Steve is not hurting anyone (without their consent), nobody, not Freya nor anyone else, has the right to take away Steve's video game teen panties, no matter how weird she thinks Steve is.

Because if we're honestly going to censor things because people are 'uncomfortable' with certain matters, well... Do I really need to point out how slippery that slope is?

You seem to be operating under the idea that people are "afraid" of panties or that people "think it's weird" to want to look at them. People are not afraid of panties. Have you ever considered that young girls and women don't want to be sexualized, and that this kind of portrayal encourages that sexualization?

It is harmful to women in real time, in real life. Worse; it sexualizes young girls, and they in turn have to deal with that from men and boys who play these games. Your horrifying arguments of "are people running around molesting children in real life?! NO?!" are perplexing. You flat out don't know that; there's no way that you could. Additionally, it is a different argument completely from video game violence vs. real life violence. Sexual objectification from characters being portrayed this way can be exhibited in real life on a much smaller scale that does not lead to bloodshed in the streets with twenty dead, but it still affects people (women) in a very real way. It also lets men get away with it in a very real way.

It's honestly outrageously offensive for you to sit here posting about how it doesn't harm anyone and how people should just be allowed their sexual perversions along with your fearmongering about "a slippery slope" of censorship. The fact that you so easily boil it down to "it's not hurting anyone" is a direct objectification of women and young girls because in saying that, you validate real-life sexualization in the same way; that "it's not hurting anyone." You are wrong that it does not hurt anyone. It hurts us.

It's not "a slippery slope of censorship." It's something that we would like to have stop happening because it affects us in real life. We would like to stop being sexualized and having young girls be sexualized. Arguing that video games do not encourage that is false. Every sexualization and objectification encourages it, period. Not only that, it is horrifyingly alarming that you are making these arguments with tones of pedophilia apologism and trying to normalize these concepts.

This shouldn't even be in line with censorship. It should be in line with human decency.

Just to add a bit to this excellent deconstruction, I have a question to you, Elipzio. At what age were you first harassed in a sexual manner? I can't, of course, evaluate your experience, but as a cis straight man, I can say that hasn't happened ever, and any expressions of sexual interest from the opposite sex haven't happened to me until I was well into my late teens.

And do you know what the women I know tell me when I ask them this question? 12. 10. Even 8. Imagine, an 8-year-old girl, being called obscene sexual things by old men on the streets and touched in inappropriate places by sleezy uncles. This happens all the time, and the media and its objectification of women is the direct cause of this. The younger the portrayal, the younger it seems acceptable for those people to do it.

So yes, this is a serious social issue and has nothing to do with censorship and everything to do with listening to and protecting the women who later get harassed because of this

Me irl right now at this whole thread.



Shorty is right.

I could write my own wall of text too, but I cannot be bothered because I'm really not interested in Star Ocean. I am however sick of boob shots and under skirt shots because just what is the point? and in before "but men are sexualised too!" yes, yes they are. I am so aware that they are, but sexualisation of men in the media does not then have an impact on young men like it does on young women.

Young women like me, who get catcalled by arseholes from vans as they speed past, who gets stared up and down if I wear a skirt, who is actually completely put off wearing skirts/low cut tops because it just encourages men to sexualise me because it is just so 'normal'.

So in the end, in simple terms, I guess the issue here isn't "ew, this is gross, I don't wanna see it", but "I don't want to see my body reduced to a piece of meat over and over and over"

Originally Posted by Fynn

To be clear - censorship happens when people's free speech is systemically limited. Think letters that get intercepted with important data erased out with a marker, or being thrown into jail for saying (not even acting on - just saying) a political opinion that is different from what the government allows, or newspapers being banned from posting anything else than what the government allows because other content could threaten their authority.

A company willingly deciding to cover up a character in their game for a foreign release to avoid backlash stemming from Values Dissonance is not censorship in any stretch of the word.

This is interesting. I wonder, if Kate Chopin's The Storm was not published during her lifetime due to its sexual themes and positive depiction of adultery, especially coming from a female author, being deemed socially unacceptable -- but not being governmentally blocked -- does this mean her being prevented from freely expressing her ideas, based not on law but on public perception, is not an act of censorship?

Can you put panty shots in your game? Absolutely. Should you put them in your game? Not in this instance, no.

If it's going to be a pornographic game, fair enough. It is what it says it is and everyone consuming it expects sexuality. Slipping them into a perfectly standard RPG is just sad though. Do you have such little faith in your game's ability to captivate your audience that you have to resort to the lowest common denominator? Fair play to them for recognising the cultural differences and tailoring their product to their intended audience.