I'm sorry, I don't even agree with calling this censorship. If someone had come in and forced them to change it, sure, that's censorship. But they did this on their own.

Someone deciding that they want to give a different product to a different audience isn't censorship, it's a personal business decision that they are absolutely allowed to make.

And before you argue "oh, it's just the localizers doing this, not the artist", bulltrout. The localizers are hired by the artists to make exactly this sort of decision. If the devs had a problem with it, they'd definitely say something, and they have the authority to make their voice heard.

But if that's censorship, let's discuss another example.

There was a book written in Britain with a title and plot device referencing classical alchemy. When it came time to release the book in America, the author thought that Americans wouldn't get the reference, and needed a "cooler" sounding name.

So anytime you get people crying "censorship" and "boycott" at this, ask them why they didn't say anything or boycott Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone for not being Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone. And when they try to justify their hypocrisy, ask them: Why is it wrong to censor something because you think another culture is more sexually prudent, but it's right to censor something because you think another culture are morons with no sense of history or heritage.